Environmental ProteeSen
             Agency
Air and Radiation
(6804JJ
402-R-OS-030
S*ptembtr1983
v/EPA     EPA's Map of Radon Zones

             GEORGIA
                                                    Recyclod/Recydablo
                                                    Printed on pap«r that contawa
                                                    nl least 50% recycled fibar

-------
Page Intentionally Blank

-------
       EPAfS MAP OF RADON ZONES
                GEORGIA
            RADON DIVISION
  OFFICE OF RADIATION AND INDOOR AIR
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
            SEPTEMBER, 1993

-------
Page Intentionally Blank

-------
                             ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
      This document was prepared by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's)
Office of Radiation and Indoor Air (ORIA) in conjunction with the U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS).  Sharon W. White was the EPA project manager.  Numerous other people in ORIA
were instrumental in the development of the Map of Radon Zones, including Lisa Ratcliff,
Kirk Maconaughey, R. Thomas Peake, Dave Rowson, and Steve Page.

      EPA would especially like to acknowledge the outstanding effort of the USGS
radon team — Linda Gundersen, Randy Schumann, Jim Otton, Doug Owen, Russell
Dubiel, Kendell Dickinson,, and Sandra Szarzi — in developing the technical base for the
Map of Radon Zones.

      ORIA  would also like to recognize the efforts of all the EPA Regional Offices in
coordinating the reviews with the State programs and the Association of American State
Geologists (AASG) for providing a liaison  with the State geological surveys. In addition,
appreciation is expressed to all of the State radon programs and geological  surveys for their
technical input and review of the Map of Radon Zones.

-------
Page Intentionally Blank

-------
           TABLE OF CONTENTS
              I. OVERVIEW
     II. THE USGS/EPA RADON POTENTIAL
        ASSESSMENTS:INTRODUCnON

  III. REGION 4 GEOLOGIC RADON POTENTIAL
                SUMMARY
V. PRELIMINARY GEOLOGIC RADON POTENTIAL
         ASSESSMENT OF GEORGIA
  V. EPA'S MAP OF RADON ZONES - GEORGIA

-------
Page Intentionally Blank

-------
                                     OVERVIEW
       Sections 307 and 309 of the 1988 Indoor Radon Abatement Act (IRAA) direct EPA to
identify areas of the United States that have *he potential to produce elevated levels of radon;
EPA, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and the Association of American State Geologists
(AASG) have worked closely over the past several years to produce a series of maps  and
documents which address these directives.  The EPA Map of Radon Zones is a compilation of
that work  and fulfills the requirements of sections 307 and 309 of IRAA. The Map of Radon
Zones identifies, on.a county-by-county basis, areas of the U.S. that have the highest potential
for elevated  indoor radon levels (greater than 4 pCi/L).
       The Map of Radon Zones is designed to assist national, State and local governments
and organizations to target their radon program activities and resources.  It is also intended to
help building code officials determine areas that are the highest priority for adopting radon-
resistant building practices.  The Map of Radon Zones should not be used to determine if
individual homes in any given area need to be tested for radon.  EPA  recommends that all
homes be tested for radon, regardless of geographic location or the zone designation of
the county in which they are located.
       This  document provides background information concerning the development of the
Map of Radon Zones. It explains the purposes of the map, the approach for developing the
map (including the respective roles of EPA and USGS), the data sources used, the conclusions
and confidence levels developed for the prediction of radon potential, and the review process
that was conducted to finalize this effort.

BACKGROUND

       Radon (Rn222) is a colorless, odorless, radioactive gas.  It comes from the natural
decay of uranium that is found in nearly all soils. It typically moves through the ground to
the air above and into homes and other  buildings through cracks and openings in the
foundation.  Any home,  school or workplace  may have a radon problem, regardless of
whether it is new or old, well-sealed or drafty, or with or without a basement.  Nearly one out
of every 15  homes in the U.S. is estimated to have elevated annual average levels of indoor
radon.
       Radon first gained national attention in early  1984, when extremely high levels of
indoor radon were found in areas of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York, along the
Reading Prong-physiographic province.  EPA established a Radon Program in 1985 to assist
States and homeowners in reducing their risk of lung cancer from indoor radon.
       Since 1985, EPA and USGS have been working together to continually  increase our
understanding of radon sources and the  migration dynamics that cause elevated indoor radon
levels.  Early efforts resulted in the 1987 map entitled "Areas with Potentially High Radon
Levels."  This map was based on limited geologic information only because few indoor radon
measurements were available at the time.  The development of EPA's Map of Radon Zones
and its technical  foundation, USGS' National Geologic Radon Province Map, has been based
on additional information from six years of the State/EPA Residential  Radon Surveys,
independent State residential surveys, and continued  expansion of geologic and geophysical
information, particularly the data from the  National Uranium Resource Evaluation project.
                                          1-1

-------
Purple of the Map of Radon Zones

       EPA's Map of Radon Zones (Figure I) assigns each of the 3141  counties in the
United States to one of three zones:

              o     Zone 1  counties have a predicted average indoor screening level > than
                    4 pCi/L

              o     Zone 2 counties have a predicted average screening level > 2 pCi/L and
        .   •        <_4 pCi/L

              o     Zone 3  counties have a predicted average screening level < 2 pCi/L

       The Zone designations were determined by assessing five factors that are known to be
important indicators of radon potential: indoor radon measurements,- geology, aerial
radioactivity, soil parameters, and foundation types.
       The predictions of average screening levels in each of the Zones is an expression of
radon^potential in the lowest liveable area of a structure.  This map is unable to estimate
actual exposures to radon.  EPA  recommends methods for testing and fixing individual homes
based on an estimate of actual exposure to radon.  For more information on testing and fixing
elevated radon levels in homes consult these EPA publications: A Citizen's Guide to Radon.
the Consumer's Guide to Radon Reduction and the Home Buyer's and Seller's Guide to
Radon,
       EPA believes that States,  local governments and other organizations can achieve
optimal risk reductions by targeting resources and program activities to high radon potential
areas.  Emphasizing targeted approaches (technical assistance, information and outreach
efforts, promotion of real estate mandates and policies and building codes, etc.) in such areas
addresses the greatest potential risks first.
       EPA also believes that  the use of passive radon control systems in the construction of
new homes in Zone 1 counties, and the activation of those systems if necessitated by follow-
up testing, is a cost effective approach to achieving significant radon risk  reduction.
       The Map of Radon Zones and us supporting  documentation establish no regulatory
requirements.  Use of this map by State or local radon programs and building  code officials  is
voluntary   The information presented on the Map of Radon Zones and in the supporting
documentation is not applicable to radon in water

Development of the Map of Radon Zones

       The technical foundation  for the Map of Radon Zones is the USGS Geologic Radon
Province Map.  In order to examine the radon potential for the United States, the USGS
began by identifying'approximately 360 separate geologic provinces for the U.S.  The
provinces are shown  on the USGS Geologic Radon Province Map (Figure 2).  Each 6f the
geologic provinces was evaluated by  examining the available data for that area: indoor radon
measurements, geology, aerial  radioactivity, soil parameters, and foundation types. As stated
previously, these five factors are considered  to be of basic importance in assessing radon
                                          1-2

-------
 Figure  1
                                                EPA   Map   of  Radon   Zones
                                                                                 Zone designation for Puerto Rico is under development.
•Guam   Preliminary Zone designation,    ^^*r  The purpose of lhis mop ;s to assist Notional. State and local organizations to target their resources and to implement radon-resistant building codes.
                                     This mop is not intended to be used to determine if a home in a given zone should be tested for radon. Homes with elevated levels of ration have been found
                                     in all  three zones.  AH harms should b» tesltd,, regardless of geographic losathn.
      IMPORTANT: Consult the £PA Map of Radon Zones document (EPA-402-ff~93-0?l) before using  this map.  This document contains information an radon potential variations  within counties.
                EPA also recommends that this  map be supplemented with any available local data in order to further understand and predict the radon potential of a specific area.

-------
Figure 2
   GENERALIZED GEOLOGIC RADON POTENTIAL OF THE UNITED STATES
                            by the U.S. Geological Survey
                                        Continental United States
                                           and Hawaii
                                                 500
                                                                Geologic Radon
                                                                   Potential
                                                                 (Predicted Average
                                                               Screening Measurement)
                                                                   LOW (<2pCI/L)

                                                                   MODERATE/VARIABLE
                                                                   (2-4pCI/L)

                                                                   HIGH (>4pC!/L)
                                            Miles
                                                                          6/93

-------
potential and some data are available for each of these factors in every geologic province. The
province boundaries do not coincide with political borders (county and state) but define areas
of general radon potential.  The five factors were assigned numerical values based on an
assessment of their respective contribution to  radon potential, and a confidence level was
assigned to each contributing variable.  The approach used by USGS to estimate the radon
potential for each province is described in Part II ot this document.
       EPA subsequently developed the Map of Radon Zones by extrapolating from the
province level to the county level so that all counties in the U.S. were assigned to one of
three radon zones. EPA assigned each county to a given zone based on its provincial radon
potential. For example, if a county is located within a geologic province that has a predicted
average screening leveFgreater than 4 pCi/L,  it  was assigned  to Zone 1. Likewise, counties
located in provinces with predicted average screening levels S 2 pCi/L and S* 4 pCi/L, and
less than 2 pCi/L, were assigned to Zones 2 and 3, respectively.
       If the boundaries of a county fall  in more than one geologic province, the county was
assigned to a zone based on  the predicted radon  potential of the province in which  most ofJ
the area lies.  For example, if three different provinces cross through a given county, the
county was assigned  to the zone representing  the radon potential of the province containing
most of the county's land area.  (In this case,  it  is not technically correct to say  that the
predicted average screening level applies to the  entire county  since the county falls in
multiple  provinces with differing radon potentials.)
       Figures 3 and 4 demonstrate an example  of how EPA  extrapolated  the county zone
designations for Nebraska from the USGS geologic province map for the  State.  As figure 3
shows, USGS has identified  5 geologic provinces for Nebraska. Most of the counties are
extrapolated "straight"  from their corresponding provinces, but there are counties "partitioned"
by several provinces  — for example, Lincoln County.  Although Lincoln county falls in
multiple  provinces, it was assigned to  Zone 3 because most of its area falls in the province
with the  lowest radon potential.
       It is important to note that EPA's extrapolation from the province level to the
county level  may mask significant "highs"  and "lows" within specific  counties. In other
words, within-county  variations in radon potential are not shown on the Map of Radon
Zones.  EPA recommends that users who may need to address  specific within-county
variations in radon  potential (e.g., local government officials considering the
implementation of radon-resistant construction codes) consult USGS' Geologic Radon
Province Map and the State chapters provided with this map for more detailed
information, as well as any  locally available data.

Map Validation

       The Map of Radon Zones is intended  to represent a preliminary assessment  of radon
potential for the entire United States.  The  factors that are used in  this effort —indoor radon
data, geology, aerial radioactivity,  soils, and foundation type — are basic indicators for radon
potential. It is important to  note, however, that  the map's county zone  designations are not
"statistically valid" predictions due to  the nature of the data available for these 5 factors at the
county level.- In order to validate the map  in light of this lack of statistical confidence, EPA
conducted a number  of analyses.  These analyses have helped EPA to identify the best
situations in which to apply  the map,  and its-limitations.
                                           1-5

-------
Figure 3
                 Geologic  Radon Potential  Provinces  for Nebraska
        Liscoln Count y
                    Uelertte      Lo*
Figure 4
         NEBRASKA  -  EPA Map  of  Radon  Zones
        l« icol's Co t s; y
         late ]     last 2    Znac J
                                       1-6

-------
       One such analysis involved comparing county zone designations to indoor radon
measurements from the State/EPA Residential Radon Surveys (SRRS). Screening averages
for Counties with at least 100 measurements were compared to the counties' predicted radon
potential as indicated by the Map of Radon Zones.  EPA found that 72% of the county
screening averages were correctly reflected by the appropriate zone designations on the Map.
In all other cases, they only  differed by 1 zone.
       Another accuracy analysis used the annual average data from the National  Residential
Radon Survey (NRRS).  The NRRS indicated that approximately 6 million homes in the
United States have annual averages greater than  or equal to 4 pCi/L.  By cross checking the
county location of the approximately 5,700 homes which participated in the survey, their
radon measurements, and the zone designations for these counties, EPA found that
approximately 3.8 million homes of the 5.4 million homes  with radon levels greater than or
equal to 4 pCi/L will be found in counties designated as Zone 1.  A random sampling of an
equal number of counties would have only found approximately  1.8 million homes greater
than  4 pCi/L.  In other words, this analysis indicated that the map approach is three times
more efficient at identifying high radon areas than random  selection of zone designations.
       Together, these analyses show that the approach EPA used to develop  the Map of
Radon Zones is a reasonable one. In addition, the Agency's confidence is enhanced by results
of the extensive State review process — the map generally agrees with the States', knowledge
of and experience in their own jurisdictions.  However, the accuracy-analyses highlight two
important points:  the fact that elevated levels will be found in Zones 2 and 3, and that there
will be significant numbers of homes with lower indoor radon levels in all of the  Zones. For
these reasons,  users of the Map of Radon  Zones need to supplement the Map with locally
available data whenever  possible.  Although all known "hot spots", i.e., localized areas of
consistently elevated levels, are discussed in the  State-
specific chapters, accurately  defining the boundaries of the  "hot spots" on this scale of map is
not possible at this time.  Also, unknown "hot spots" do exist.
       The Map of Radon Zones is  intended to be a starting point for characterizing  radon
potential because our knowledge  of radon sources and transport is always growing.  Although
this effort represents the best data available at this time, EPA will continue to study these
parameters and others such as house construction, ventilation features and meteorology  factors
in order to better characterize the presence of radon in U.S homes, especially  in high risk
areas.  These efforts will eventually assist EPA in refining  and revising the conclusions of  the
Map of Radon Zones. And although this map is most appropriately used as a targeting tool
by the aforementioned audiences — the Agency  encourages all residents to test their  homes
for radon, regardless of geographic location or the zone designation of the county  in
which they live.  Similarly, the  Map of Radon Zones should not to  be used  in lieu  of
testing during .real estate transactions.

Review Process

       The Map of Radon Zones has undergone extensive review within EPA and outside  the
Agency.  The Association of American State Geologists (AASG) played an integral role in
this review process. The AASG individual State geologists have reviewed their State-specific
information, the USGS Geologic Radon Province Map, and other materials for their geologic
content and consistency.
                                          1-7

-------
       In addition to each State geologist providing technical comments, the State radon
offices were asked to comment on their respective States' radon potential evaluations.  In
particular, the States were asked to evaluate the data used to assign their counties to specific
zones,  EPA and USGS worked with the States to resolve any issues concerning county zone
designations.   In a few cases, States have requested changes in county zone designations.  The
requests were based on additional data from the State on geology, indoor radon
measurements, population, etc.  Upon reviewing the data submitted by the  States, EPA did
make some changes in zone designations.  These changes, which do not strictly follow the
methodology  outlined in this document, are discussed in the respective State chapters.
       EPA encourages the States and counties to conduct, further research and data collection
efforts to refine the Map of Radon Zones. EPA would like to be kept informed of any
changes the States, counties, or others make to the maps. Updates and revisions will be
handled in a similar fashion to the way the map was developed.  States should notify EPA of
any proposed changes by forwarding the changes through the Regional EPA offices that are
listed in Part  II.  Depending on the amount of new information that is presented, EPA  will
consider updating this map periodically. The State radon programs should initiate proper
notification of the appropriate State officials when the Map of Radon Zones is released and
when revisions or updates are made by the State or EPA.
                                           1-8

-------
    THE USGS/EPA RADON POTENTIAL ASSESSMENTS: AN INTRODUCTION
                                           by
                      Linda C.S. Gundersen and R. Randall Schumann
                                  U.S. Geological Survey
                                           and
                                    Sharon W. White
                           U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

BACKGROUND

    The Indoor Radon Abatement Act of 1988  (15 U.S.C. 2661-2671) directed the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to identify areas of the United States that have the
potential to produce harmful levels  of indoor radon.  These characterizations were to be based
on both geological data and on indoor radon  levels in homes and other structures.  The EPA
also was directed to develop model  standards and techniques for new building construction
that would provide  adequate prevention  or mitigation of radon entry.  As part of an
Interagency Agreement between the EPA and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the USGS
has prepared  radon  potential estimates for the United States.  This report is one of ten
booklets that  document this effort.  The purpose and intended use of these reports is to help
identify areas where states can target their radon program resources, to provide guidance in
selecting the  most appropriate building code options for areas, and to provide general
information on radon  and geology for each state for federal, state, and municipal officials
dealing with  radon issues.  These reports are not intended to be used as a substitute for
indoor radon testing,  and they cannot and should not be  used to estimate or predict the
indoor radon concentrations of individual homes, building sites, or housing tracts.  Elevated
levels of indoor radon have been found in every Stale, and EPA recommends that all homes
be tested for  indoor radon.
    Booklets  detailing the radon potential assessment for the U.S. have been developed for
each State. USGS geologists are the authors  of the geologic radon potential booklets. Each
booklet consists of several components,  the first being an overview to the mapping project
(Part I), this introduction to the USGS assessment (Part II), including a general discussion of
radon (occurrence, transport, etc.),, and details concerning the types of data used.-  The third
component is a summary chapter outlining the general geology and geologic radon potential
of the EPA Region  (Part III).  The  fourth component is an individual chapter for each state
(Part IV), Each state  chapter discusses the state's specific geographic setting, soils,  geologic
setting, geologic radon potential, indoor radon data, and a summary outlining the radon
potential rankings of geologic areas in the state. A variety of maps are presented in each
chapter—geologic, geographic, population, soils, aerial radioactivity,  and indoor radon data by
county. Finally, the booklets contain  EPA's map of radon zones for  each state and an
accompanying description (Part V).
  .  Because of constraints on the scales of maps presented in these reports and because the
smallest units used to present the indoor radon  data are counties, some generalizations have
been  made in order to estimate the radon potential  of each area.  Variations in geology, soil
characteristics, climatic factors, homeowner lifestyles, and other factors that influence radon
concentrations can be quite large within any particular geologic area, so these reports cannot
be used to estimate or predict the indoor radon concentrations of individual homes or housing


                                           II-1     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
tracts.  Within any area of a given geologic radon potential ranking, there are likely to be
areas where the radon potential is lower or higher than that assigned to the area as a whole,
especially in larger.areas such as the large counties in some western states.      • ...
    In each state chapter, references to additional reports related to  radon are listed for the
state,, and the reader is urged to consult these reports for more detailed information.  In most
cases the best sources of information on radon for specific areas are state and local
departments of health, state departments responsible for nuclear safety or environmental
protection, and U.S". EPA regional offices.  More detailed information on state or local
geology may be obtained from the state geological surveys.  Addresses and telephone
numbers of state radon contacts, geological surveys, and EPA regional offices are listed in
Appendix C at the end of this chapter,

RADON GENERATION AND TRANSPORT IN SOILS

    Radon (2J:Rn) is produced from the radioactive decay of radium (I26Ra), which is, in turn,
a product of the decay of uranium (U8U) (fig.  1). The half-life of 3~Rn is 3,825 days.  Other
isotopes of radon occur naturally, but, with the exception of thoron  ("°Rn), which occurs  in
concentrations high enough to be of concern in a few localized areas, they are less important
in terms of indoor  radon risk because of their extremely short half-lives and less common
occurrence.  In general, the concentration and mobility  of radon in soil are dependent on
several  factors, the most important of which are the soil's radium content and distribution,
porosity, permeability to gas movement, and moisture content.  These characteristics are,  in
turn, determined by the soil's parent-material composition, climate, and the soil's age or
maturity.  If parent-material composition, climate, vegetation, age of the soil, and topography
are known, the physical and chemical properties of a soil in a given area can be predicted.
    As soils form, they develop distinct layers, or horizons, that are cumulatively called the
soil profile.  The A horizon is a surface or near-surface horizon containing a relative
abundance of organic matter but dominated by mineral  matter.  Some soils contain an ,E
horizon, directly below the A horizon, that is  generally  characterized by loss of clays, iron, or
aluminum, and has a  characteristically lighter  color than the A  horizon. The B  horizon
underlies the A or E horizon.  Important characteristics of B horizons include accumulation of
clays, iron oxides, calcium carbonate or other soluble salts, and organic matter complexes.  In
drier environments, a horizon may exist within or below the B horizon that is dominated  by
calcium carbonate,  often called caliche  or calcrete.  This carbonate-cemented horizon is
designated the K horizon  in modern soil classification schemes.  The C horizon underlies the
B (or K) and is a zone of weathered parent material that does not exhibit characteristics of A
or B horizons; that is, it is generally not a zone of leaching or accumulation.  In soils formed
in place from  the underlying bedrock, the C horizon is  a zone of unconsolidated, weathered
bedrock overlying the unweathered bedrock.
    The shape and  orientation of soil particles (soil structure) control permeability  and affect
water movement in the soil.  Soils with blocky or granular structure have roughly equivalent
permeabilities in the horizontal and vertical directions, and air and water can infiltrate the soil
relatively easily.  However, in soils with platy structure, horizontal permeability is  much
greater than vertical permeability, and air and moisture infiltration is generally slow.   Soils
with prismatic or columnar structure have dorninantly vertical permeability.  Platy  and
prismatic*structures form  in soils with high clay contents.  In soils with shrink-swell clays, air


                                           II-2    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
                           Polontum-218,
                      a^-—3.05 mln.
       Lead

        27mln" ^Blsmuth.214

              P  19Jmln-^gpolonlynv214
       Lead.210 ^2*~~~^ 164 itsec.

              j\Blsmuth-210
              H  5.01 davs^P
                          ^Poloniian-210
       Lead-206  ^^T-^ 138.4 days
        STABLE       a
                                            Radon-222
                                            3.82 days
                                                                                        Uranlum-238
                                                                                       4.51 billion years
                                                                   Thorlum-234   ""^
                                                                        days S|
                                                                           p \Prottctlnlum-234 I
                                                                             1.17mln.>i  „   .   „.
                                                                                    n\Uranlum-234
                                                                                  .Jx^ 247,000 years
                                                                     Thorlum-230^xjr
                                                                   JlpOOyiirs    a
                                                         Radlum-226 f a
                                                          1602 years
Figure 1. The uranlum-238 decay series, showing the half-lives of elements and their modes of decay (after Wanty and
Schoen, 1991).  a denotes alpha decay, p denotes beta decay.

-------
and moisture infiltration rates and depth of wetting may be limited when the cracks in the
surface soil layers swell shut. Clay-rich B horizons, particularly those with massive or platy
structure, can form a capping layer that impedes the  escape of soil gas to the surface
(Schumann and others, 1992). However, the shrinkage of clays can,act to open or widen
cracks upon drying, thus increasing the soil's permeability to gas flow during drier.periods.
       Radon transport in soils occurs by  two processes:  (1) diffusion and (2) flow (Tanner,
1964). Diffusion is the process whereby radon atoms move from areas of higher
concentration to areas of lower concentration in response to a concentration gradient. Flow is
the process by which soil  air moves through soil pores in response to differences in pressure
within the  soil or between the soil and the atmosphere, carrying the radon atoms along  with it.
Diffusion is the dominant radon transport  process in  soils of low permeability, whereas flow
tends to dominate in highly permeable soils (Sextro and others, 1987).  In low-permeability
soils, much of the radon may decay before it is able  to enter a building because its transport
rate is reduced.  Conversely,  highly permeable soils,' even those that are relatively  low in
radium, such as those derived from some types of glacial deposits, have been associated with
high indoor radon levels in Europe and in the northern United States (Akerblom and others,
1984; Kunz and others, 1989; Sextro and others, 1987). In areas of karst topography formed
in carbonate rock (limestone  or dolomite)  environments, solution cavities  and fissures can
increase soil permeability  at depth by providing additional pathways for gas flow.
    Not all radium contained in soil grains and grain coatings will result in mobile radon
when the radium decays.  Depending on where the radium is distributed in the soil, many of
the radon atoms may remain  imbedded in  the soil grain containing the parent radium atom, or
become imbedded in adjacent soil grains.  The portion of radium that releases radon into the
pores and fractures of rocks and soils is called the emanating fraction.  When a radium  atom
decays to radon, the energy generated is strong enough to send the radon  atom a distance of
about 40 nanometers (1 nm = 10"" meters), or about 2x10'* inches—this is known as alpha
recoil (Tanner,  1980), Moisture in the soil lessens the chance of a recoiling radon atom
becoming imbedded in an adjacent grain.  Because water is more dense than air, a radon atom
will travel  a shorter distance  in  a  water-filled pore than in an air-filled pore, thus increasing
the likelihood that the radon  atom will remain in the pore space. Intermediate moisture levels
enhance radon emanation but do not significantly affect permeability.  However, high
moisture levels can significantly decrease the gas permeability of the soil  and impede radon
movement  through the soil.
    Concentrations of radon in soils are generally many times higher than those inside of
buildings, ranging from tens of pCi/L to more than 100,000 pCi/L, but typically in the range
of hundreds to low thousands of pCi/L, Soil-gas radon concentrations can vary  in response to
variations in climate and  weather  on  hourly, daily, or seasonal  time scales.  Schumann and
others (1992) and  Rose and others (1988) recorded order-of-magnitude variations in soil-gas
radon concentrations between seasons in Colorado and  Pennsylvania, The most important
factors appear to be (1) soil moisture conditions, which are controlled in large part by
precipitation; (2) barometric pressure; and (3) temperature,  Washington and Rose (1990)
suggest that temperature-controlled partitioning of radon between water and gas in soil  pores
also has a significant influence on the amount  of mobile radon in soil gas.
    Homes in hilly limestone regions of the  southern Appalachians were found to  have higher
indoor radon concentrations during the summer than  in the winter. A suggested cause for this
phenomenon involves temperature/pressure-driven flow of radon-laden air from subsurface
           %
                                           H-4     Reprinted from USOS  Open-File Report 93-292

-------
solution cavities in the carbonate rock into houses.  As warm air enters solution cavities that
are higher on the hillslope than the homes, it cools and settles, pushing radon-laden air from
lower in the cave or cavity system into structures on the hillslope (Gammage and others,
1993).  In contrast, homes built over  caves having openings situated below the level of the
home had higher indoor radon levels  in the winter, caused by cooler outside air entering the
cave, driving radon-laden air into cracks and solution cavities in the rock and soil, and
ultimately, into homes (Gammage and others, 1993).

RADON ENTRY INTO BUILDINGS

    A driving force (reduced atmospheric pressure in the house relative to the soil, producing
a pressure gradient) and entry points must exist for radon to enter a building from the soil.
The negative pressure caused by furnace combustion, ventilation devices, and the stack effect
(the rising and escape of warm air from the upper floors of the building, causing a
temperature and pressure gradient within the structure) during cold  winter months are
common driving forces.  Cracks and other penetrations through building foundations,  sump
holes, and slab-to-foundation wall joints are common entry points.
    Radon levels in the basement are generally higher than those on the main floor or upper
floors of most structures.  Homes with basements generally provide more entry points for
radon, commonly have a more pronounced stack effect, and typically have lower air pressure
relative  to the surrounding soil than nonbasement homes.  The term "nonbasement" applies to
slab-on-grade or crawl space construction.

METHODS AND SOURCES OF DATA

    The assessments of radon potential in the booklets that follow this introduction were
made using five main types of data: (1) geologic (lithologic); (2) aerial radiometric; (3) soil
characteristics, including soil moisture, permeability, and drainage characteristics; (4) indoor
radon data; and (5) building architecture (specifically, whether homes in each area are built
slab-.on-grade or have a basement or crawl  space). These five factors were evaluated  and
integrated to produce estimates of radon potential. Field measurements of soil-gas radon or
soil radioactivity were not used except where such data were available in existing, published
reports of local field studies. Where applicable, such field studies are  described in the
individual state chapters.

GEOLOGIC DATA

    The types and distribution of lithologic units and other geologic features in an
assessment area are of primary importance in determining radon potential. Rock types that
are most likely to cause indoor radon problems include carbonaceous black shales, glauconite-
bearing  sandstones, certain kinds of fluvial sandstones and fluvial sediments, phosphorites,
chalk, karst-producing carbonate rocks, certain kinds of glacial  deposits, bauxite, uranium-rich
granitic rocks, metamorphic rocks of granitic composition, silica-rich volcanic rocks, many
sheared  or faulted rocks, some coals,  and certain kinds of contact metamorphosed rocks.
Rock types least likely to cause radon problems include marine quartz sands, non-
carbonaeeous shales and siltstones, certain kinds of clays, silica-poor metamorphic and


                                           II-5     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
igneous rocks, and basalts. Exceptions exist within these general lithologic groups because of
the occurrence of localized uranium deposits, commonly of the hydrothermal type in
crystalline rocks or the "roll-front" type in sedimentary rocks.  Uranium and radium are
commonly sited in heavy  minerals, iron-oxide coatings on rock and soil grains, and organic
materials in soils and sediments.  Less common are uranium associated with phosphate and
carbonate complexes in rocks and soils, and uranium minerals.
    Although many cases of elevated  indoor radon levels can be traced to high radium and
(or) uranium concentrations in parent  rocks, some structural features, most notably faults and
shear zones, have been-jdentified as sites of localized uranium concentrations (Deffeyes and
MacGregor, 1980) and have been associated with some of the highest reported indoor radon
levels (Gundersen, 1991). The two highest known indoor radon occurrences are associated
with sheared fault zones in Boyertown, Pennsylvania (Gundersen and others, 1988a; Smith
and others, 1987), and in Clinton, New Jersey (Henry and others, 1991; Muessig and Bell,
1988).

NURE AERIAL RADIOMETRIC DATA

    Aerial radiometric data are used to quantify the radioactivity of rocks and soils.
Equivalent uranium (eU) data provide an estimate of the surficial concentrations of radon
parent materials  (uranium, radium) in  rocks and soils. Equivalent uranium is- calculated from
the counts received by a gamma-ray detector from  the 1.76 MeV (mega-electron volts)
emission energy corresponding to bismuth-214 (I14Bi), with the assumption that uranium and
its decay products are in secular  equilibrium.  Equivalent uranium is expressed in units of
parts  per million (ppm).  Gamma radioactivity also may be expressed in terms of a radium
activity; 3 ppm eU corresponds to approximately 1 picocurie per gram (pCi/g) of radium-226. ,
Although  radon is highly mobile in soil  and its concentration is affected by  meteorological
conditions (Kovach, 1945; Klusman and Jaacks, 1987; Schery and others, 1984; Schumann
and others, 1992), statistical correlations between average soil-gas radon concentrations and
average eU values for a wide variety of soils have  been documented (Gundersen and others,
1988a, 1988b; Schumann  and Owen, 1988)  Aerial radiometric data can provide an estimate
of radon source strength over a region, but  the amount  of radon that is able to enter a home
from  the soil is dependent on several local factors, including soil structure, grain size
distribution, moisture  content,  and permeability, as well as type of house construction and its
structural  condition.
    The aerial radiometric data used for these characterizations were collected as part of the
Department of Energy National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE)  program of the 1970s
and early  1980s.  The purpose of the NURE program was to identify and describe areas in the
United States having potential  uranium resources (U.S.  Department of Energy, 1976). The
NURE aerial radiometric data  were collected by aircraft in which a gamma-ray spectrometer
was mounted, flying approximately 122  m (400 ft) above-the ground surface.  The equivalent
uranium maps presented in the state chapters were generated from reprocessed NURE data in
which smoothing, filtering, recalibrating, and matching of adjacent  quadrangle data sets were
performed to compensate  for background, altitude, calibration, and  other types of errors and
inconsistencies in the  original data set (Duval and others, 1989).  The data were then gridded
and contoured to produce maps of eU with a pixel size corresponding to approximately 2.5 x
2.5 km (1.6  x 1.6 mi).


                                           H-6    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
                 fllCBT LINE  SPACING OF  SURE  AERIAL  SURVEYS
                     2  IM '(! .MILE)
                     5  EM (3  MILES]
                     2  i- 5 KM
                     10 111 {6  UUES)
                     5  t 10  IM
                     NO DATA
Rgtn-e 2. Nominal flightline spacings for NURE aerial gamma-ray surveys covering the
contiguous United States (from Duval and others, 1990). Rectangles represent I°x2° quadrangles.

-------
    Figure 2 is an index map of NURE 1° x 2° quadrangles showing the flight-line spacing
for each quadrangle.  In general, the more closely spaced the flightlines are, the more area
was covered by the aerial gamma survey, and thus, more detail is available in the" data set.
For an altitude of 400 ft above the ground surface and with primary flightline spacing
typically between 3 and 6 miles, less than  10 percent of the ground surface of the United
States was actually measured by the airborne gamma-ray detectors (Duval  and others, 1989),
although some areas had better coverage than others due to the differences in  flight-line
spacing between  areas (fig. 2).   This suggests that some  localized uranium  anomalies may not
have been detected by The aerial surveys, but the good correlations of etJ patterns with
geologic outcrop  patterns indicate that, at relatively small scales (approximately  1:1,000,000
or smaller) the National eU map (Duval and others,  1989) gives reasonably good estimates of
average surface uranium concentrations and thus can assist in the prediction of radon potential
of rocks and soils, especially when augmented with additional geologic and soil  data.
    The shallow  (20-30 cm) depth of investigation of gamma-ray spectrometers, either
ground-based or airborne (Duval and others, 1971; Durrance, 1986), suggests that gamma-ray
data may sometimes underestimate the radon-source  strength in -soils in which some of the
radionuclides in the near-surface soil  layers have been transported downward through the soil
profile,  In such cases the concentration of radioactive minerals in the A horizon would be
lower than in the B horizon, where such  minerals are typically concentrated.  The
concentration of radionuclides in the C horizon and below may be relatively unaffected by
surface  solution processes.  Under these conditions the surface gamma-ray  signal may indicate
a lower radon source concentration than actually exists in the deeper soil layers, which are
most likely to affect radon levels in structures with basements.  The redistribution of
radionuclides in soil profiles is dependent on a combination of climatic, geologic, and
geochemical factors.  There is reason to believe that correlations of eU with actual soil
radium  and uranium concentrations at a depth relevant to radon entry into structures may be
regionally variable (Duval, 1989; Schumann and Gundersen, 1991).  Given sufficient
understanding of  the factors cited above, these regional differences may be predictable.

SOIL SURVEY DATA

    Soil surveys  prepared by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service (SCS) provide  data on soil
characteristics,  including soil-cover thickness, grain-size  distribution, permeability, shrink-
swell  potential, vegetative cover, generalized groundwater characteristics, and  land use.  The
reports are available in county formats and State summaries.  The county reports typically
contain  both generalized and detailed maps of soils in the area.
    Because of time and map-scale constraints, it was impractical to examine  county soil
reports for each county in the United States, so  more generalized summaries at appropriate
scales were used  where available.  For State or regional-scale radon characterizations, soil
maps were compared to geologic maps of the area, and the soil descriptions, shrink-swell
potential, drainage characteristics, depth to seasonal high  water table, permeability, and other
relevant characteristics of each soil group noted.  Technical soil terms  used in soil surveys are
generally complex; however, a good summary of soil engineering terms and the national
distribution of technical soil types is the  "Soils" sheet of the National Atlas (U.S. Department
of Agriculture, 1987).   '                       '        .
                                           II-8     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
  -  Soil permeability is commonly expressed in SCS soil surveys in terms of the speed, in
inches per hour (in/hr), at which water soaks into the soil, as measured in a soil percolation
test. Although in/hr are not truly units of permeability, these units  are in widespread use and
are referred to  as "permeability" in SCS soil surveys.  The permeabilities listed in the SCS
surveys are  for water, but they generally correlate well with gas permeability. Because data
on gas permeability of soils is extremely limited, data on permeability to water is used  as a
substitute except in cases in which excessive soil moisture is known to exist. Water in soil
pores inhibits gas transport, so the amount of radon available to a home is effectively reduced
by a high water table.  Areas likely to have high water tables include river valleys, coastal
areas, and some areas overlain by deposits of glacial origin (for example, loess).
    Soil permeabilities greater than 6.0 in/hr may be considered high, and permeabilities less
than 0.6 in/hr may be considered low in terms of soil-gas transport.  Soils with low
permeability may generally be considered to have a lower radon potential than more
permeable soils with similar radium concentrations.  Many well-developed soils contain a
clay-rich B  horizon that may impede vertical soil gas transport.  Radon generated below this
horizon cannot readily escape to the surface, so it would instead tend to move laterally,
especially under the influence of a negative pressure exerted by.a building.
    Shrink-swell potential is an indicator of the abundance of smectitic (swelling) clays in a
soil. Soils with a high shrink-swell potential may  cause  building foundations to crack,
creating pathways for radon entry into the structure.  During dry periods, desiccation cracks in
shrink-swell soils provide additional pathways for soil-gas transport and effectively increase
the gas permeability of the soil.  Soil  permeability data and soil profile data thus provide
important information for regional radon assessments.

INDOOR RADON DATA

    Two major sources of indoor radon  data were  used.  The first and largest source of data is
from the State/EPA Residential Radon Survey (Ronea-Battista and others, 1988;  Dziuban and
others, 1990). Forty-two states completed EPA-sponsored indoor radon surveys between 1986
and 1992  (fig. 3).  The State/EPA Residential Radon Surveys were designed to be
comprehensive and statistically significant at the state level, and were subjected to high  levels
of quality assurance and control.  The surveys collected screening indoor radon measurements,
defined as 2-7 day measurements using charcoal canister radon detectors placed in the lowest
livable area of  the home.  The target population  for the surveys included owner-occupied
single family, detached housing units (White and others,  1989), although attached structures
such as duplexes, townhouses, or condominiums were included in some of the surveys if they
met the other criteria and had contact with the ground surface.  Participants were selected
randomly from telephone-directory  listings.  In total, approximately 60,000 homes were tested
in the State/EPA surveys.
    The second source of indoor radon data comes from  residential  surveys that have been
conducted in a specific state or region of the country  (e.g. independent state surveys or  utility
company surveys).  Several states; including Delaware, Florida, Illinois, New Hampshire, New
Jersey, New York, Oregon, and Utah, have, conducted their own surveys of indoor radon.  The
quality  and  design of a state or other independent survey  are discussed and referenced where
the data are used.
                                           II-9    . Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
                                      STATE/EPA RESIDENTIAL RADON
                                   SURVEY SCREENING MEASUREMENTS
                             0
Estimated Percent of Houses with Screening Levels Greater than 4 pCi/L

                                             20    and >

ITic SUIcs of OIU1 jm I.NJ JOT, ind 1 JT
hiivc conducted Ineir nwn survcjrs, OR &
SI) declined lo pjrticipalc in the SKKS.

-^i— ^— li— :.- J
                                                           These results arc based on 2-7 day screening
                                                           measurements in the lowest livable level and should not
                                                           be used to estimate annual averages or health risks.
Figure 3. Percent of homes tested in the State/EPA Residential Radon Survey with screening indoor radon levels exceeding 4 pCi/L.

-------
     Data for only those counties with five or more measurements are shown in the indoor
 radon maps in the state chapters,  although data for all counties with a nonzero number of
 measurements are listed in the indoor radon data tables in each state chapter.  In total, indoor
 radon data from more than 100,000 homes nationwide were used in the compilation of these
 assessments. Radon data from State or regional indoor radon surveys, public health
 organizations, or other sources are discussed in addition to the primary data sources where
 they are available.  Nearly all of the data used in these evaluations represent short-term (2-7
 day) screening measurements from the lowest livable space of the homes.  Specific details
 concerning the nature and use of indoor radon data sets other than the State/EPA Residential
 Radon Survey are discussed in the individual State chapters.

 RADON INDEX AND CONFIDENCE INDEX

     Many of the geologic methods used to evaluate an area for radon potential require
 subjective opinions  based on the professional judgment and experience oFthe individual
 geologist. The evaluations are nevertheless based on established scientific principles that are
 universally applicable to any geographic area or geologic setting.  This section describes the
. methods and conceptual framework used by the U.S. Geological Survey to evaluate areas for
 radon potential based on the five factors discussed in the previous sections.  The scheme is
 divided into two basic parts, a Radon Index (RI), used to rank the general radon potential of
 the area, and the Confidence Index (CI), used to express the level of confidence in the
 prediction based on the quantity and quality of the data used  to make the determination.  This
 scheme works best if the areas to be evaluated are delineated by geologically-based
 boundaries (geologic provinces) rather  than political ones (state/county boundaries) in which
 the geology may vary across the area.
     Radon Index. .Table 1 presents the Radon Index  (RI) matrix. The five factors—indoor
 radon data, geology, aerial  radioactivity, soil parameters, and  house foundation type—were
 quantitatively ranked (using a point value of 1, 2, or 3) for their respective contribution to
 radon potential in a given area. At least some data for the 5  factors are consistently available
 for every geologic province.  Because each of these main factors encompass a wide variety of
 complex and variable components, the  geologists performing  the evaluation relied heavily  on
 their professional judgment and experience in assigning point values to each category and in
 determining the overall radon potential  ranking.  Background information  on these factors is
 discussed in more detail in the preceding sections of this  introduction.
     Indoor radon was evaluated using unweighted  arithmetic  means of the  indoor .radon data
 for each geologic area to be. assessed   Other expressions of indoor radon levels in an area
 also could have been  u'sed, such as weighted averages or  annual averages, but  these types of
 data were not consistently available for the entire United States at the time of this writing, or
 the schemes were not considered sufficient to provide a means of consistent comparison
 across all areas.  For this report, charcoal-canister screening measurement data from the
 State/EPA Residential Radon Surveys and other carefully selected sources were used, as
 described in the  preceding section.  To  maintain consistency,  other indoor radon data sets
 (vendor, state, or other data) were not considered in scoring the indoor radon factor of the
 Radon Index if they were not randomly sampled or could not be statistically combined with
 the primary indoor radon data sets.  However, these additional radon data sets can provide a
 means to. further refine correlations between geologic factors  and radon potential, so they are


                                           II-11     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
TABLE 1. RADON INDEX MATRIX, "ppm eU" indicates parts per million of equivalent
uranium, as indicated by NURE aerial radiometric data. See text discussion for details.

FACTOR
INDOOR RADON (average)
AERIAL RADIO ACnVTTY
GEOLOGY*
SOIL PERMEABILITY
ARCHITECTURE TYPE
INCREASING RADON POTENTIAL ^

POINT VALUE
1
<2pCi/L
< 1.5 ppm eU
negative
low
mostly slab
2
2-4pCi/L
L5 - 2.5 ppm eU
variable
moderate
mixed
3
>4pCi/L
> 2.5 ppm eU
positive
high
mostly basement
*GEOLOGIC FIELD EVIDENCE (GFE) POINTS: GFE points are assigned in addition to points
   for the "Geology" factor for specific, relevant geologic field studies. See text for details.

   Geologic evidence supporting:   HIGH radon        +2 points
                              MODERATE       +1 point
                              LOW              -2 points
                  No relevant geologic field studies    0 points
SCORING:
            Radon potential category
                      Point ranee
      Probable average screening
       indoor radon for area
            LOW
            MODERATE/VARIABLE
            HIGH
                      3-8  points
                      9-11 points
                     12-17 points
           <2pCi/L
           2-4pCi/L
           >4pCi/L
                     POSSIBLE RANGE OF POINTS = 3 to 17
TABLE 2.  CONFIDENCE INDEX MATRIX

FACTOR
INDOOR RADON DATA
AERIAL RADIOACITvTrY
GEOLOGIC DATA
SOIL PERMEABILITY
IISCRMASLNU CONFIDENCE ^

POINT VALUE
1
sparse/no data
questionable/no data
questionable
questionable/no data
2
fair coverage/quality
glacial cover
variable
variable
3
good coverage/quality
no glacial cover
proven geol. model
reliable, abundant
SCORING:
LOW CONFIDENCE
MODERATE CONFIDENCE
HIGH CONFIDENCE
 4-6  points
 7-9  points
10 -12 points
                     POSSIBLE RANGE OF POINTS = 4 to 12
                                     H-12
                           Reprinted from USGS Open-Fiie Report 93-292

-------
included as supplementary information and are discussed in the individual State chapters. If
the average screening indoor radon level for an area was less than 2 pCi/L, the indoor radon
factor was assigned 1 point, if it was between 2 and 4 pCi/L, it was scored  2 points, and if
the average screening indoor radon level for an area was greater than 4 pCi/L, the indoor
radon factor was assigned 3 RI points.
    Aerial radioactivity data used in this report are from the equivalent uranium map of the
conterminous United States compiled from NURE aerial gamma-ray surveys (Duval and
others, 1989).  These data indicate the gamrna  radioactivity from  approximately the upper 30
cm of rock and soil, expressed in units of ppm equivalent uranium.  An approximate average
value of eU was determined visually for each area and point values assigned based on
whether the overall eU for the area falls below 1.5  ppm (1 point), between  1.5  and 2.5 ppm
(2 points), or greater than 2.5  ppm (3 points).
    The geology factor is complex and actually incorporates many geologic characteristics.  In
the matrix, "positive" and "negative" refer to the presence or absence and distribution of rock
types known to have high uranium contents and to generate elevated radon in soils or indoors.
Examples of "positive" rock types include granites,  black shales, phosphatic rocks, and other
rock types described in the preceding "geologic data" section. Examples of "negative" rock
types include marine quartz sands and some clays.  The term "variable" indicates that the
geology within the region is variable or that the rock types in the area are known or suspected
to generate elevated radon in some areas but not in others due to  compositional differences,
climatic effects, localizeddistribution of uranium, or other factors.  Geologic information
indicates not only how much uranium is present in  the rocks and  soils  but also  gives clues for
predicting general radon  emanation and mobility characteristics through additional factors
such as structure (notably the presence of faults or shears) and geochemical  characteristics
(for example, a phosphate-rich sandstone will likely contain more uranium than a sandstone
containing little or no phosphate because the phosphate forms chemical complexes with
uranium).  "Negative", "variable", and "positive" geology were  assigned 1, 2, and 3 points,
respectively.
    In cases where additional  reinforcing or contradictory geologic evidence is  available,
Geologic Field Evidence (GFE)  points were added to or subtracted from an  area's score
(Table  1).  Relevant  geologic field studies are  important to enhancing our understanding of
how geologic processes affect radon distribution.  In some cases,  geologic models and
supporting field data reinforced an already strong (high or low) score;  in others, they provided
important contradictory  data.  GFE points-were applied for geologically-sound evidence that
supports  the prediction (but which may  contradict one or more  factors) on the basis of known
geologic field  studies in  the area or in areas with geologic and  climatic settings similar
enough that they could be applied with  full  confidence. For example,  areas of the Dakofas,
Minnesota, and Iowa that are covered with Wisconsin-age glacial deposits exhibit a low aerial
radiometric signature and score only one RI point in that category. However,  data from
geologic field  studies in  North Dakota and Minnesota (Schumann and  others, 1991) suggest
that eU is a poor predictor of geologic radon potential in this area because radionuclides have

                                          II-13     Reprinted  from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
been leached from the upper soil layers but are present and possibly even concentrated in
deeper soil horizons, generating significant soil-gas radon. This positive supporting field
evidence adds two GFE points to the score, which helps to counteract the invalid conclusion
suggested by the radiometric data.  No GFE points are awarded if there are no documented
field studies for the  area.
    "Soil permeability" refers to several soil characteristics that influence radon concentration
and mobility, including soil type, grain size, structure, soil moisture, drainage, slope, and
permeability.  In the matrix, "low"  refers to permeabilities less than about 0.6 in/hr; "high"
corresponds to greater 4han about 6.0 in/hr, in U.S. Soil Conservation Service (SCS) standard
soil percolation tests. The SCS data are for water permeability, which  generally correlates
well with the gas permeability of the soil except when the soil moisture content is very high. .
Areas with consistently high water  tables were thus considered to have low gas permeability.
"Low, "moderate", and  "high" permeability were assigned  1,  2, and  3 points,  respectively.
    Architecture  type refers to whether homes  in the area have  mostly  Basements (3 points),
mostly slab-on-grade construction (1 point), or a mixture of the. two. Split-level and crawl
Space homes fall  into the  "mixed" category (2 points).  Architecture information  is necessary
to properly interpret the indoor radon data and produce geologic radon  potential categories
that are consistent with screening indoor radon data.
     The overall  RI  for an area is calculated by adding the individual RI scores for the 5
factors, plus or minus GFE points,  if any.  The total RI for an area falls in one of three
categories—low,  moderate or variable, or high.  The point ranges for the three categories were
determined by examining the possible combinations of points for the 5  factors .and setting
rules such that a  majority (3 of 5 factors) would determine the final score for the low and
high categories, with allowances for possible deviation from  an  ideal score by the other two
factors.  The moderate/variable category lies between these two ranges.  A total deviation of 3
points from the "ideal"  score was considered reasonable to allow for natural variability of
factors—if two of the five factors are allowed to vary from the "ideal"  for a category, they
can differ by a minimum  of 2 (1  point different each) and a  maximum  of 4 points (2 points
different each).  With "ideal" scores of 5,  10, and 15  points describing  low, moderate, and
high geologic  radon  potential, respectively, an ideal low score of 5 points plus 3 points for
possible variability allows a maximum of 8 points in the low category.   Similarly, an  ideal
high score of  15  pomts minus 3 points gives a minimum of 12  points for the high category.
Note, however, that  if both other factors differ by two points from the  "ideal", indicating
considerable variability in the system,  the total poini score would lie in the adjacent (i.e.,
moderate/variable) category.
    Confidence Index.. Except for architecture type, the same factors were used to establish a
Confidence Index (CI) for the radon potential prediction for  each area (Table 2).  Architecture
type was not included in  the confidence index because house construction data are readily and
reliably available through surveys taken by agencies and industry groups including the
National Association of Home Builders, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development, and the Federal Housing Administration; thus  it was not  considered necessary

                                           11-14     Reprinted from  USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
to question the quality or validity of these data.  The other factors were scored on the basis of
the quality and quantity of the data used to complete the RI matrix.
    Indoor radon data were evaluated based on the distribution and number of data points and
on whether the data were collected by random sampling (State/EPA Residential Radon Survey
or other state survey data) or volunteered vendor data (likely to be nonrandom and biased
toward population centers and/or high  indoor radon levels).  The categories listed in the CI
matrix for indoor radon data ("sparse or no data", "fair coverage or quality", and "good
coverage/quality") indicate the sampling density and statistical  robustness of an indoor radon
data set.  Data from the State/EPA Residential Radon Survey and statistically valid state
surveys were typically assigned 3 Confidence Index points unless the data were poorly
distributed or absent in the area evaluated.
    Aerial radioactivity data are available for all  but a few areas of the continental United  .
States and for part of Alaska.   An evaluation  of the quality of  the radioactivity data was based
on whether there appeared to be a good correlation between  the radioactivity and the actual
amount of uranium or radium available to generate mobile radon in the rocks and soils of the
area evaluated.  In general, the greatest problems with correlations among eU,  geology, and
soil-gas or indoor radon levels were associated with glacial deposits (see the discussion in a
previous section) and typically were assigned a 2-point Confidence Index score.  Correlations
among eU, geology, and radon were generally sound in unglaciated areas and were usually
assigned 3 CI  points.  Again, however, radioactivity data in some unglaciated areas may have
been assigned  fewer than  3 points, and in glaciated areas may be assigned only one point, if
the data were considered questionable or if coverage was poor.
    To assign  Confidence Index scores for the geologic data factor, rock types and geologic
settings for which a physical-chemical, process-based understanding of radon generation and
mobility  exists were regarded as having "proven geologic models" (3 points); a high
confidence could be held  for predictions in such areas. Rocks  for which the processes are
less "well known or for which  data are contradictory were regarded as "variable" (2 points),
and those about which little is  known or for which no apparent correlations have been found
were deemed "questionable" (1 point).
    The soil permeability factor was also scored based on  quality and amount  of data.  The
three categories for soil permeability in the Confidence Index are similar in concept, and
scored similarly, to those  for the geologic  data factor. Soil permeability can be roughly
estimated from grain size and drainage class if data from standard, accepted soil  percolation
tests are  unavailable; however, the reliability of the data would be lower than if percolation
test figures or other measured permeability data are available, because an estimate of this type
does not encompass all the factors that affect soil permeability and thus may be inaccurate in
some instances.  Most published soil permeability data are for  water; although this is
generally closely related to the air permeability of the soil, there are some instances when it
may provide an incorrect estimate. Examples of areas in which water permeability data may
not accurately reflect air permeability include areas with consistently high levels of soil
moisture, or clay-rich  soils, which would have a  low water permeability but may have a

                                           11-15     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
significantly higher air permeability when dry due to shrinkage cracks in the soil.  These
additional factors were applied to the soil permeability factor when assigning the RI score, but
may have less certainty in some cases and thus would be assigned a lower CI score.
    The Radon Index and Confidence Index give a general indication of the relative
contributions of the interrelated geologic factors influencing  radon generation and transport in
rocks and soils, and thus, of the potential for elevated indoor radon levels to occur in a
particular area.  However, because these reports are somewhat generalized to cover relatively
large areas of States, it is highly  recommended that more detailed studies be performed in
local areas of interest, -using the methods  and general information in these booklets as a guide.
                                          11-16     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
                                 REFERENCES CITED

Akerblom, G., Anderson, P., and Clavensjo, B., 1984, Soil gas radon—A source for indoor radon
       daughters: Radiation Protection Dosimetry, v. 7, p, 49-54.

Deffeyes, K.S., and MacGregor, I.D., 1980, World uranium resources: Scientific American,
       v. 242, p. 66-76.

Durrance, E.M., 1986, Radioactivity in geology: Principles and applications:  New York, N.Y.,
       Wiley and Sons, 441 p.

Duval, J.S., 1989, Radioactivity and some of its applications in geology: Proceedings of the
       symposium on the application of geophysics to engineering and environmental problems
       (SAGEEP), Golden, Colorado, March 13-16,1989:  Society of Engineering and Mineral
       Exploration Geophysicists, p. 1-61.

Duval, J.S., Cook, E.G., and Adams, J.A.S., 1971, Circle of investigation of an airborne
       gamma-ray spectrometer: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 76, p. 8466-8470.

Duval, J.S., Jones, W.J., Riggle, F.R., and Pitkin, J.A., 1989, Equivalent uranium map of
       conterminous United States:  U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 89-478,10 p.

Duval, J.S., Reimer, G.M., Schumann, R.R., Owen, D.E., and Otton, J.K., 1990,  Soil-gas
       radon compared to aerial and ground gamma-ray measurements at study sites near Greeley
       and Fort Collins, Colorado:  U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 90-648,42 p,

Dziuban, J.A., Clifford, M.A., White, S.B., Bergstein, J.W.,  and Alexander, B.V., 1990,
       Residential radon survey of twenty-three States, in Proceedings of the 1990 International
       Symposium on Radon and Radon Reduction Technology, Vol. HI: Preprints: U.S.
       Environmental Protection Agency report EPA/600/9-90/005c, Paper IV-2,17 p.

Gammage, R.B., Wilson, D.L., Saultz, RJ,, and Bauer, B.C., 1993, Subtereanean transport of
       radon and elevated indoor radon in hilly karst terranes:  Atmospheric Environment
       (in press).

Gundersen, L.C.S., Reimer, G.M., and Agard, S.S., 1988a, Correlation between geology, radon
       in soil gas, and indoor radon in the Reading Prong, in Marikos, M. A.,  and Hansman,
       R.H., eds., Geologic causes of natural radionuclide anomalies: Missouri Department of
       Natural Resources Special Publication 4, p. 91-102.

Gundersen, L.C.S, Reimer, G.M., Wiggs, C.R., and Rice, C.A., 1988b, Map showing radon
       potential of rocks and soils in Montgomery County, Maryland: U.S. Geological Survey
       Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-2043, scale 1:62,500.

Gundersen, Linda C.S., 1991, Radon in sheared metamorphic and igneous rocks, in Gundersen,
       Linda C.S., and Richard B. Wanty, eds., Field studies of radon in rocks, soils, and water:
       U.S. Geol. Survey Bulletin no. 1971, p. 39-50.
                                         II-17     Reprinted from USGS Open-FUe Report 93-292

-------
Henry, MitcheU E., Kacding, Margret E., and Monteverde, Donald, 1991, Radon in soil gas and
       gamma-ray activity of rocks and soils at the Mulligan Quarry, Clinton, New Jersey, in
       Gundersen, Linda C.S., and Richard B. Wanty, eds., Field studies of radon in rocks,
       soils, and water:  U.S. Geol. Survey Bulletin no. 1971, p. 65-75.

Klusman, R. W., and Jaacks, J. A., 1987, Environmental influences upon mercury, radon, and
       helium concentrations in soil gases at a site near Denver, Colorado: Journal of
       Geochemical Exploration, v. 27, p. 259-280.

Kovach, E.M., 1945, Meteorological influences upon the radon content of soil gas: Transactions,
       American Geophysical Union, v. 26, p. 241-248.

Kuriz, C., Laymon, C.A., and Parker, C., 1989, Gravelly soils and indoor radon, in Osborne,
       M.C., and Harrison, J., eds., Proceedings of the  1988 EPA Symposium on Radon and
       Radon Reduction Technology, Volume  1: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report
       EPA/600/9-89/006A, p. 5-75-5-86.

Muessig, K., and Bel, C., 1988, Use of airborne radiometric data to direct testing for elevated
       indoor radon: Northeastern Environmental Science, v. 7, no. 1, p. 45-51.

Ronca-Battista, M., Moon, M., Bergsten, J., White, S.B., Holt, N., and Alexander, B., 1988,
       Radon-222 concentrations in the United States—Results of sample surveys in five states:
       Radiation Protection Dosimetry, v. 24, p. 307-312.

Rose, A.W., Washington, J.W.,  and Greeman,  D.J.,  1988, Variability of radon with depth and
       season in a central Pennsylvania soil developed on limestone: Northeastern Environmental
       Science, v. 7, p. 35-39.

Schery, S.D., Gaeddert, D.H., and Wilkening,  M.H., 1984, Factors affecting exhalation of radon
       from a gravelly sandy loam: Journal of  Geophysical Research, v. 89, p. 7299-7309.

Schumann, R.R., and Owen, D.E., 1988, Relationships between geology, equivalent uranium
       concentration, and radon in soil gas, Fairfax County, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey
       Open-File Report 88-18,28 p.

Schumann, R.R., and Gundersen, L.C.S., 1991, Regional differences in radon emanation
       coefficients in soils:  Geological Society of America Abstracts With Programs, v. 23,
       no.  1, p.  125.

Schumann, R.R., Peakc, R.T., Schmidt, K.M., and Owen, D.E., 1991, Correlations of soil-gas
       and indoor radon with geology in glacially derived soils of the northern Great Plains, in
       Proceedings of the 1990 International Symposium on Radon and Radon Reduction
       Technology, Volume 2, Symposium Oral Papers: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
       report EPA/600/9-91/026b, p. 6-23-6-36.
                                         JJ-18     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
Schumann, R.R., Owen, D.E., and Asher-Bolinder, S., 1992, Effects of weather and soil
       characteristics on temporal variations in soil-gas radon concentrations, in Gates, A.E., and
       Gundersen, L.C.S., eds., Geologic controls on radon: Geological Society of America
       Special Paper 271, p. 65-72.

Sextro, R.G., Moed, B.A., Nazaroff, W.W., Revzan, K.L., and Nero, A.V., 1987,
       Investigations of soil as a source of indoor radon, in  Hopke, P.K., ed., Radon and its
       decay products: American Chemical Society Symposium Series 331, p. 10-29.

Sterling, R.,  Meixel, G., Shen, L., Labs, K., and Bligh, T., 1985, Assessment of the energy
       savings potential of building foundations research:  Oak Ridge, Tenn., U.S. Department of
       Energy Report ORNL/SUB/84-0024/1.

Smith, R.C., TJ, Reilly,. M. A., Rose, A.W., Barnes, J.H., and Berkheiser, S.W., Jr., 1987,
       Radon: a profound case: Pennsylvania Geology, v. 18, p. 1-7.

Tanner, A.B., 1964, Radon migration in the ground: a review, in Adams, J.A.S., and Lowder,
       W.M., eds., The natural radiation environment:  Chicago, 11., University of Chicago
       Press, p. 161-190.

Tanner, A.B., 1980, Radon migration in the pound: a supplementary review, in Gesell, T.F.,
       and Lowder, W.M. (eds), Natural radiation environment in, Symposium proceedings,
       Houston, Texas, v. 1, p. 5-56.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1987, Principal kinds of soils:  Orders, suborders, and great
       groups: U.S. Geological Survey, National Atlas of the United States of America, sheet
       38077-BE-NA-07M-00, scale 1:7,500,000.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1976, National Uranium Resource Evaluation preliminary report,
       prepared by the U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration, Grand Junction,
       Colo.: GJO-11(76).

Wanty, Richard B., and Schoen, Robert, 1991, A review of the chemical processes affecting the
      .mobility of radionuclides in natural waters, with applications, in Gundersen, Linda C.S.,
       and Richard B. Wanty, eds., Field studies of radon in rocks, soils, and water: U.S.
       Geological Survey Bulletin no. 1971, p.  183-194.

Washington, J;W., and Rose, A.W., 1990, Regional and temporal relations .of radon in soil gas to
       soil temperature and moisture: Geophysical Research Letters, v. 17, p. 829-832.

White, S.B., Bergsten, J.W., Alexander, B.V., and Ronca-Battista, M., 1989,  Multi-State
       surveys of indoor 222Rn:  Health Physics, v. 57, p. 891-896.
                                         JJ-19     Reprinted from TJSGS Open-FUe Report 93-292

-------
                                               APPENDIX  A
                                       GEOLOGIC TIME  SCALE
Subdivisions {and their symbols)
ion or
. Eonothtm
"hanerozoie1

Proteroioic
(PI


Archean
(A)

Ira or
Erathem
Cenoioie 2
(CD
Mesozotc*
JMt}

Paleozoic
lr«


Ml*
^'ett'Oto-c d
MOOH
p*9t»»0fe* tvi
£*rvy
•mxaiix rxi
LIU
AitM»« (Wi
MKHK
Af*ft»«« IVI
Period, System,
Subperiod, Subsystem
Quaternary
(Q)
Neog«n» *
SuSeeried or
T«fii»fY SuBsyit.m IN!
pn Pii*oetn«
• - Subotnod or
Sybsyiwm (Pil
Cretaceous
rw
Jurassic
UJ
Triassic
it}
Permian
(P)
Pennsylvania!!
Carboniferous • "'
fC) Mississippian

-------
                                    APPENDIX  B
                               GLOSSARY OF TERMS


Units of measure

pCi/L (picocuries per liter)- a unit of measure of radioactivity used to describe radon
concentrations in a volume of air.  One picocurie (10"12 curies) is equal to about 2.2 disintegrations
of radon atoms per minute. A liter is about 1.06 quarts. The average concentration of radon in
U.S. homes measured to date is between 1 and 2 pO/L.

Bq/m3 (Becquerels per cubic meter)- a metric unit of radioactivity used to describe radon
concentrations in a volume of air.  One becquerel is equal to one radioactive disintegration per
second. One pO/L is equal to 37 Bq/m3.

ppm (parts per million)- a unit of measure of concentration by weight of an element in a
substance, in this case, soil or rock.  One ppm of uranium contained in a ton of rock corresponds
to about 0.03 ounces of uranium. The average concentration of uranium in soils in the United
States is between 1 and 2 ppm.

in/hr (inches per hour)- a unit of measure used by soil  scientists and engineers to describe the
permeability of a soil to water flowing through it It is measured by digging a hole 1 foot (12
inches) square and one foot deep, filling it with water, and measuring the time it takes for the water
to drain from the hole. The drop in height of the water level in the hole, measured in inches, is
then divided by the time (in hours) to determine the permeability. Soils range in permeability from
less than 0.06 in/hr to greater than 20 in/hr, but most soils in the United States have permeabilities
between these two extremes.
geologic terms and terms related to ,thg study of radon

aerial radiometric, aeroradiometric survey  A survey of radioactivity, usually gamma rays,
taken by an aircraft carrying a gamma-ray spectrometer pointed at the ground surface.

alluvial fan A low, widespread mass of loose rock and soil material, shaped like an open fan
and deposited by a stream at the point where it flows from a narrow mountain valley out onto a
plain or broader valley. May also form at the junction with larger streams or when the gradient of
the stream abruptly decreases.

alluvium, alluvial General terms referring to unconsolidated detrital material deposited by a
stream or other body of running water.

alpha-track detector A passive radon measurement device consisting of a plastic film that is
sensitive to alpha particles.  The film is etched with acid in a laboratory after it is exposed.  The
etching reveals scratches, or "tracks", left by the alpha particles resulting from radon decay, which
can then be counted to calculate the radon concentration. Useful for long-term (1-12 months)
radon tests.

amphibolite A mafic metamorphic rock consisting mainly of pyroxenes and(or) amphibole and
plagioclase.
                                          11-21      Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
argillite, argillaceous Terms refening to a rock derived from clay or shale, or any sedimentary
rode containing an appreciable amount of clay-size material, i.e., argillaceous sandstone.

arid Term describing a climate characterized by dryness, or an evaporation rate that exceeds the
amount of precipitation.

basalt A general term for a dark-colored mafic igneous rocks that may be of extrusive origin,
such as volcanic basalt flows, or intrusive origin, such as basalt dikes.

batholith  A mass of plutonic igneous rock that has more than 40 square miles of surface
exposure and no known bottom.

carbonate  A sedimentary rock consisting of the carbonate (COa) compounds of calcium,
magnesium, or iron, e.g. limestone and dolomite.

carbonaceous Said of a rock or sediment that is rich in carbon, is coaly, or contains organic
matter.

charcoal canister A passive radon measurement device consisting of a small container of
granulated activated charcoal that is designed to adsorb radon. Useful for short duration (2-7 days)
measurements only. May be referred to as a "screening" test

chert A hard, extremely dense sedimentary rock consisting dominantly of interlocking crystals of
quartz. Crystals  are not visible to the naked eye, giving the rock a milky, dull luster.  It may be
white or gray but is commonly colored red, black, yellow, blue, pink, brown, or green,

clastic pertaining to a rock or sediment composed of fragments that are derived  from preexisting   .
rocks or minerals. The most common clastic sedimentary rocks are sandstone and shale,

clay A rock containing clay mineral fragments or material of any composition having a diameter  •
less than 1/256 mm.

clay mineral One of a complex and loosely defined group of finely crystalline minerals made up
of water, silicate and aluminum (and a wide variety of other elements). They are formed chiefly by
alteration or weathering of primary silicate minerals. Certain clay minerals  are noted for their small
size and ability to absorb substantial amounts of water, causing them to swell.  The change in size
that occurs as these clays change between dry and wet is referred to as their "sh rink-swell"
potential.

concretion  A hard, compact mass of mineral matter, normally subspherical but commonly
irregular in shape; formed by precipitation from a water solution about a nucleus or center, such as
a leaf, shell, bone, or fossil, within a sedimentary or fractured rock.

conglomerate A coarse-grained, clastic sedimentary rock composed of rock and mineral
fragments larger than 2 mm, set in a finer-grained matrix of clastic material.

cuesta A hill or ridge with a gentle slope on one side and a steep slope on the other. The
formation of a cuesta is controlled by the different weathering properties and the  structural dip of
the rocks forming the hill or ridge.

daughter product A nuclide formed by the disintegration of a radioactive precursor or "parent"
atom.
                                          11-22      Reprmted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
delta, deltaic  Referring to a low, flat, alluvial tract of land having a triangular or fan shape,
located at or near the mouth of a river. It results from the accumulation of sediment deposited by a
river at the point at which the river loses its ability to transport .the sediment, commonly where a
river meets a larger body of water such as a lake or ocean.

dike A tabular igneous intrusion of rock, younger than the surrounding rock, that commonly cuts
across the bedding or foliation of the rock it intrudes.

diorite A plutonic igneous rock that is medium in color and contains visible dark minerals that
make up less than 50% of the rock. It also contains abundant sodium plagioclase and minor .
quartz.                "    .

dolomite  A carbonate sedimentary rock of which more than 50% consists of the mineral dolomite
(CaMg(COs)2), and is commonly white, gray, brown, yellow, or pinkish in color.

drainage The manner in which the waters of an area pass, flow off of, or flow into the soil
Also refers to the water features of an area, such as lakes and rivers, that drain it

eolian Pertaining to sediments deposited by the wind.

esker A long, narrow, steep-sided ridge composed of irregular beds of sand and gravel deposited
by streams beneath a glacier and left behind when the ice melted.

evapotranspiration Loss of water from a land area by evaporation from the soil and
transpiration from plants.

extrusive Said of igneous rocks that have been erupted onto the surface of the Earth.

fault  A fracture or zone of fractures in rock or sediment along which there has been movement

fluvial, fluvial deposit  Pertaining to sediment that has been deposited by a river or stream.

foliation A linear feature in a rock defined by both mineralogic and structural characteristics.  It
may be formed during deformation or metamorphism.

formation A mappable body of rock having similar characteristics.

glacial deposit Any sediment transported and deposited by a glacier or processes associated
with glaciers, such as glaciofluviai sediments deposited by streams flowing from melting glaciers.

gneiss A rock formed by metamorphism in which bands and lenses of minerals of similar
composition alternate with bands and lenses of different composition, giving the rock a striped or
"foliated" appearance.

granite Broadly applied, any coarsely crystalline, quartz- and feldspar-bearing igneous plutonic
rock.  Technically, granites have-between 10 and 50% quartz, and alkali feldspar comprises at least
65% of the total feldspar.

gravel An unconsolidated, natural accumulation of rock fragments consisting predominantly of
particles greater than 2 mm in size.

heavy minerals Mineral grains in sediment or sedimentary rock having higher than average
specific gravity.  May form layers and lenses because of wind or water sorting by weight and size
                                          11-23     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
and may be referred to as a "placer deposit" Some heavy minerals are magnetite, garnet, zircon,
monazite, andxenotime.

igneous Said of a rock or mineral that solidified from molten or partly molten rock material. It is
one of the three main classes ir* o which rc^Vs are d:vH»H , the others bHng sedimentary and
mctamorphic.

intermontane A term that refers to an area between two mountains or mountain ranges.

intrusion, intrusive The processes of emplacement or injection of molten rock into pre-existing
rock. Also refers to the rock formed by intrusive processes, such as an "intrusive igneous rock".

kame A low mound, knob, hummock, or short irregular ridge formed by a glacial stream at the
margin of a melting glacier; composed of bedded sand and gravel.

karst terrain A type of topography that is formed on limestone, gypsum and other rocks by
dissolution of the rock by water, forming sinkholes and caves.

lignite A brownish-black coal that is intermediate in coalification between peat and
subbituminous coal.

limestone A carbonate sedimentary rock consisting of more than 50% calcium carbonate,
primarily in the form of the mineral calcite
IHhoIogy The description of rocks in hand specimen and in outcrop on the basis of color,
composition, and grain size.

loam A permeable soil composed of a mixture of relatively equal parts clay, silt, and sand, and
usually containing some organic matter.

loess A fine-grained eolian deposit composed of silt-sized particles generally thought to have
been deposited from windblown dust of Pleistocene age.

mafic Term describing an igneous rock containing more than 50% dark-colored minerals.

marine Term describing sediments deposited in the ocean, or precipitated from ocean waters,

metamorphic Any rock derived from pre-existing rocks by mineralogical, chemical, or structural
changes in response to changes in temperature, pressure, stress, and the chemical environment.
Phyllite, schist, amphibolite, and gneiss are metamorphic rocks.

moraine A mound, ridge, or other distinct accumulation of unsorted, unbedded glacial material,
predominantly till, deposited by the action of glacial ice.

outcrop That part of a geologic formation or structure that appears at the surface of the Earth, as
in "rock outcrop".

percolation test A term used in engineering for a test to determine the water permeability of a
soil. A hole is dug and filled with water and the rate of water level decline is measured.

permeability  The capacity of a rock, sediment, or soil to transmit liquid or gas,

phosphate, phosphatic, phosphorite  Any rock or sediment containing a significant amount
of phosphate minerals, i.e., minerals containing PO4.


                                         11-24     Reprinted from USGS Open-FOe Repeat 93-292

-------
physiographic province A region in which all parts are similar in geologic structure and
climate, which has had a uniform geomorphic history, and whose topography or landforms differ
significantly from adjacent regions.

*>I?cer deposit See heavy minerals

residual Formed by weathering of a material in place.

residuum Deposit of residual material.

rhyolite An extrusive igneous rock of volcanic origin, composMonally equivalent to granite.

sandstone A clastic sedimentary rock composed of sand-sized rock and mineral material that is
more or less firmly cemented. Sand particles range from 1/16 to 2 mm in size.

schist A strongly foliated crystalline rock, formed by metamorphism, that can be readily split into
thin flakes or slabs.  Contains mica; minerals are typically aligned.

screening level Result of an indoor radon test taken with a charcoal canister or similar device,
for a short period of time, usually less than seven days. May indicate the potential for an indoor
radon problem but does not indicate annual exposure to radon.

sediment Deposits of rock and mineral particles or fragments originating from material that is
transported by air, water or ice, or that accumulate by natural chemical precipitation or secretion of
organisms.

semiarid Refers to a climate that has slightly  more precipitation than an arid climate.

shale A fine-grained sedimentary rock formed from solidification (Ethification) of clay or mud.

shear zone Refers to a roughly linear zone of rock that has been faulted by ductile or non-ductile
processes in which the rock is sheared and both sides are displaced relative to one another.

shrink-swell clay  See clay mineral.

siltstone A fine-grained clastic sedimentary rock composed of silt-sized rock and mineral
material and more or less firmly cemented. Silt particles range from 1/16 to 1/256 mm in size.

sinkhole A roughly circular depression in a karst area measuring meters to tens of meters in
diameter. It is funnel shaped and is formed by collapse of the surface material into an underlying
void created by the dissolution of carbonate rock.

slope An inclined part of the earth's surface.

solution cavity A hole, channel or cave-like cavity formed by dissolution of rock.

stratigraphy The study of rock strata; also refers to the succession of rocks of a particular area.

surficial materials Unconsolidated glacial," wind-, or waterborne deposits occurring nn the
earth's surface.

tablelands General term for a broad, elevated region with a nearly level surface of considerable
extent  -
                                          11-25     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
terrace gravel Gravel-sized material that caps ridges and terraces, left behind by a stream as it
cuts down to a lower leveL

terrain A tract or region of the Earth's surface considered as a physical feature or an ecological
environment
     *
till Unsorted.» .generally unconsolidated and unbedded rock and mineral material deposited directly
adjacent to and underneath a glacier, without reworking by meltwater. Size of grains varies greatly
from clay to boulders.

uraniferous Containing uranium, usually more than 2 ppm.

vendor data Used in mis report to refer to indoor radon data collected and measured by
commercial vendors of radon measurement devices and/or services.

volcanic Pertaining to the activities, structures, and extrusive rock types of a volcano.

water table The surface forming the boundary between the zone of saturation and the zone of
aeration; the top surface of a body of unconfined groundwater in rock or soil.

weathering The destructive process by which earth and rock materials, on exposure to
atmospheric elements, are changed in color, texture, composition, firmness, or form with little or
no transport of the material.
                                          11-26     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
                                           APPENDIX  C
                                   EPA REGIONAL OFFICES
 EPA  Regional   Offices
State
EPA  Region
 EPA Region 1
 JFK Federal Building
 Boston, MA 02203
 (617) 56S-4502

 EPA Region 2
 (2AIR:RAD)              "~
 26 Federal Plaza
 New York, NY 10278
 (212) 264-4110

 Region 3 (3AH14)
 841 Chestnut Street
 Philadelphia, PA 19107
 (215) 597-8326

 EPA Region 4
 345 Courtland Street, N.E.
 Atlanta, GA 30365
 (404) 347-3907

 EPA Region 5 (5AR26)
 77 West Jackson Blvd.
 Chicago, IL 60604-3507
 (312) 886-6175

 EPA Region 6 (6T-AS)
' 1445 Ross Avenue
 Dallas, TX 75202-2733
 (214) 655-7224

 EPA Region 7
 726 Minnesota Avenue
 Kansas City, KS 66101
 (913) 551-7604

 EPA Region 8
 (8HWM-RP)
 999 18th Street
 One Denver Place, Suite 1300
 Denver, CO 80202-2413
 (303) 293-1713

 EPA Region 9 (A-3)
 75 Hawthorne Street
 San Francisco, CA 94105
 (415) 744-1048

 EPA Region 10
 1200 Sixth Avenue
 Seattle, WA 98101
 (202) 442-7660
Alabama	........4
Alaska	10
Arizona	9
Arkansas	6
California	9
Colorado....,	8
Connecticut	1
Delaware..	;3
District of Columbia	;	3~
Florida	4
Georgia	.....4
Hawaii	9
Idaho	10
Illinois.....	5
Indiana	5
Iowa	,	7
Kansas	i	7
Kentucky	4
Louisiana	6
Maine	."..1
Maryland	3
Massachusetts	1
Michigan..	,...5
Minnesota	5
Mississippi	.....4
Missouri	7
Montana	.........8
Nebraska	...7
Nevada	9
New Hampshire	1
New  Jersey...	2
New Mexico	6
New York	2
North  Carolina	.....4
North  Dakota	8
Ohio	5
Oklahoma	,	6
Oregon	10
Pennsylvania	3
Rhode Island	1
South  Carolina	4
South  Dakota	8
Tennessee	4
Texas	,	..6
Utah....	8
Vermont	1
Virginia	;	..3
Washington	10
West Virginia	3
Wisconsin	5
Wyoming	8
                                                  11-27      Reprinted from USGS Open-Kle Report 93-292

-------
                 STATE RADON  CONTACTS
                             May, 1993
Ajalyima
James McNees
Division of Radiation Control
Alabama Department of Public Health
State Office Building
Montgomery, AL 36130
(205) 242-5315
1-800-582-1866 in state

Charles Tedford
Department of Health and Social
  Services
P.O. Box 110613
Juneau, AK 99811-0613
(907)465-3019
1-800-478-4845 in state

John Stewart
Arizona Radiation Regulatory Agency
4814 South 40th St
Phoenix, AZ 85040
(602) 255-4845
LeeGershner
Division of Radiation Control
Department of Health
4815 Markham Street, Slot 30
Little Rock, AR 72205-3867
(501) 661-2301
J, David Quinton
Department of Health Services
714 P Street, Room 600
Sacramento, CA 94234-7320
(916)324-2208
1-800-745-7236 in state
Linda Martin
Department of Health
4210 East 11th Avenue
Denver, CO 80220
(303)692-3057
1-800-846-3986 in state
 Connecticut Alan J. Siniscalchi
            Radon Program
            Connecticut Department of Health
              Sendees
            150 Washington Street
            Hartford, CT 0610&4474
            (203) 566-3122

   Detoyare MaraiG. Rejai
            Office of Radiation Control
            Division of Public Health
            P.O. Box 637
            Dover, DE 19903
            (302)736-3028
            1-800-554-4636 In State

    District Robert Davis
of Colombia DC Department of Consumer and
              Regulatory Affairs
            614 H Street NW
            Room 1014
            Washington, DC 20001
            (202)727-71068

     Boridj N. Michael Gilley
            Office of Radiation Control
            Department of Health and
              Rehabilitative Services
            1317 Winewood Boulevard
            Tallahassee, PL 32399-0700
            (904)488-1525
            1-800-543-8279 in state
                                                               Richard Schreiber
                                                               Georgia Department of Human
                                                                 Resources
                                                               878 Peachtree St. Room 100
                                                               Atlanta, GA 30309
                                                               (404) 894-6644
                                                               1-800-745-0037 in state
                                                        Haaaii Russell Takata
                                                               Environmental Health Services
                                                                 Division
                                                               591 Ala Moana Boulevard
                                                               Honolulu,.HI 96813-2498
                                                               (808) 586-4700           :
                               n-28
                                                         Reprinted from USGS Open-Pie Report 93-292

-------
fflu
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
PaiMcGavam
Office of Environmental Health
450 West State Street
Boise, ID 83720
(208)334-6584
1-8QO-445-8647 in state
Richard Allen
Illinois Department of Nuclear Safety
1301 Outer Park Drive
Springfield, IL 62704
(217) 524-5614
1-800-325-1245 in state
Lorand Magyar
Radiological Health Section
Indiana State Department of Health
1330 West Michigan Street
P.O. Box 1964
Indianapolis, IN 46206
(317) 633-8563
1-800-272-9723 In State

Donald A. Plater
Bureau of Radiological Health
Iowa Department of Public Health
Lucas State Office Building
Des Moines, IA 50319-0075
(515)281-3478
1-800-383-5992 In State

Harold Spiker
Radiation Control Program
Kansas Department of Health and
  Environment
109 SW 9th Street
6th Floor Mills Building
Topeka, KS 66612
(913) 296-1561

Jeana Phelps
Radiation Control Branch
.Department of Health Services
Cabinet for Human Resources
275 East Main Street
Frankfort, KY 40601
(502) 564-3700
    Louisiana  Matt Schlenker
              Louisiana Department of
                Environmental Quality
              P.O. Box 82135
              Baton Rouge, LA 70884-2135
              (504) 925-7042
              1-800-256-2494 in state

       Maine  BobStilwell
              Division of Health Engineering
              Department of Human Services
              State House, Station 10
              Augusta, ME 04333
              (207)289-5676
              1-800-232-0842 in state

    Maryland  Leon J. Rachuba
              Radiological Health Program
              Maryland Department of the
                Environment
              2500 Broening Highway
              Baltimore, MD 21224
              (410) 631-3301
              1-800-872-3666 In State

Massachusetts  William J. Bell
              Radiation Control Program
              Department of Public Health
              23 Service Center
              Northampton, MA 01060
              (413) 586-7525
              1-80CM45-1255 in state

    Michigan  Sue Hendershott
              Division of Radiological Health
              Bureau of Environmental and
                Occupational Health
              3423 North Logan Street
              P.O. Box 30195
              Lansing, MI 48909
             . (517) 335-8194

    Minnesota  Laura Oatmann
              Indoor Air Quality Unit
              925 Delaware Street, SE
              P.O. Box 59040
              Minneapolis, MN 55459-0040
              (612) 627-5480
              1-800-798-9050 in state
                                                n-29
                                            Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
Missouri
Montana
               Silas Anderson
               Division of Radiological Health
               Department of Health
               3150 Lawson Street
               P.O. Box 1700
               Jackson, MS 39215-1700
               (601)354-6657
               1-800-626-7739 in state

               Kenneth V. Miller
               Bureau of Radiological Health
               Missouri Department of Health
               1730 East Elm
               P.O. Box 570
               Jefferson City, MO 65102
               (314)751-6083
               1-800-669-7236 In State

               Adrian C. Howe
               Occupational Health Bureau
               Montana Department of Health and
                 Environmental Sciences
               Cogswell Building A113
               Helena, MT 59620
               (406)444-3671
               Joseph Milone
               Division of Radiological Health
               Nebraska Department of Health
               301 Centennial Mall, South
               P.O. Box 95007
               Lincoln, NE 68509
               (402)471-2168
               1-800-334-9491 In State

               Stan Marshall
               Department of Human Resources
               505 East King Street
               Room 203
               Carson City, NV 89710
               (702) 687-5394
New Hampshire David Chase
               Bureau of Radiological Heallh
               Division of Public Health Services
               Health and Welfare Building
               Six Hazen Drive
               Concord, NH 03301
               (603) 271-4674
               1-800-852-3345 x4674
Nebraska
   New Jersey  Tonalee Carlson Key
               Division of Environmental Quality
               Department of Environmental
                Protection
               CN415
               Trenton, NJ 08625-0145
               (609)987-6369
               1-800-648-0394 in state

  New Mexico  William M. Floyd
               Radiation Licensing and Registration
                Section
               New Mexico Environmental
                Improvement Division
               1190 St. Francis Drive
               Santa Fe,NM 87503
               (505)827-4300

    New York  William J. Condon
               Bureau of Environmental Radiation
                Protection
               New York State Health Department
               Two University Place
               Albany, NY 12202
               (518)458-6495  "
               1-800-458-1158 in state

North Carolina  Dr. Felix Fong
               Radiation Protection Division
               Department of Environmental Health
                and Natural Resources
               701 Barbour Drive
               Raleigh, NC 27603-2008
               (919) 571-4141
               1-800-662-7301 (recorded info x4196)

 North Dakota  Arlen Jacobson
               North Dakota Department of Health
               1200 Missouri Avenue, Room 304
               P.O. Box 5520
               Bismarck, ND 58502-5520
               (701)221-5188
                                                                Marcie Matthews
                                                                Radiological Health Program
                                                                Department of Health
                                                                1224 Kinnear Road - Suite 120
                                                                Columbus, OH 43212
                                                                (614)644-2727
                                                                -1-800-523-4439 in state
                                               n-so
                                                          Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
PuertoRicQ
Rhode Island
South Carolina
 Gene Smith
 Radiation Protection Division
 Oklahoma State Department of
   Health
 P.O. Box 53551
 Oklahoma City, OK 73152
 (405) 271-5221
 George Toombs
 Department of Human Resources
 Health Division
 1400 SW 5th Avenue
 Portland, OR 97201
 (503)731-4014
 Michael Pyles
 Pennsylvania Department of
   Environmental Resources
 Bureau of Radiation Protection
 P.O. Box 2063
 Harrisburg, PA 17120
'(717)783-3594
 1-800-23-RADON In State

 David Saldana
 Radiological Health Division
 G.P.O. Call Box 70184
 Rio Piedras, Puerto Rico 00936
 (809) 767-3563
 Edmund Arcand
 Division of Occupational Health and
   Radiation
 Department of Health
 205 Cannon Building
 Davis Street
 Providence, RI02908
 (401) 277-2438
               Bureau of Radiological Health
               Department of Health and
                 Environmental Control
               2600 Bull Street
               Columbia, SC 29201
               (803)734^4631
               1-800-768-0362
Sooth Dakota MkePochop
             Division of Environment Regulation
             Department of Water and Natural
               Resources
             Joe Foss Building, Room 217
             523 E. Capitol
             Pierre, SD 57501-3181
             (605) 773-3351

   Tennessee Susie Shimek
             Division of Air Pollution Control
             Bureau of the Environment
             Department of Environment and
               Conservation
             Customs House, 701 Broadway
             Nashville, TN 37219-5403
             (615) 532-0733
             1-800-232-H39 in state

       Texas Gary Smith
             Bureau of Radiation Control
             Texas Department of Health
             1100 West 49th Street
             Austin, TX 78756-3189
             (512) 834-6688
        Utah John Hultquist
             Bureau of Radiation Control
             Utah State Department of Health
             288 North, 1460 West
             P.O. Box 16690
             Salt Lake City, UT 84116-0690
             (801) 536-4250

             Paul Clemons
             Occupational and Radiological Health
               Division
             Vermont Department of Health
             10 Baldwin Street
             Montpelier, VT 05602
             (802) 828-2886
             1-800-640-0601 in state

Virgin Islands Contact the U.S. Environmental
             Protection Agency, Region II
             in New York
             (212)264-4110
                                               n-3i
                                            Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
Virginia        Shelly Ottenbrite
                Bureau of Radiological Health
                Department of Health
                109 Govenior Street
                Richmond, VA 23219
                (804)786-5932
                1-800-468-0138 in state

Washington      Kate Coleman
                Department of Health
                Office of Radiation Protection
                Airdustrial Building 5, LE-13
                Olympia,WA 98504,
                (206)753^518
                1-800-323-9727 In State

W.estVrirginia    Beattie L. DeBptd
                Industrial Hygiene Division
                West Virginia Department of Health
                151 llth Avenue
                South Charleston, WV 25303
                (304)558-3526
                1-800-922-1255 In State

Wisconsin       Conrad Weifienbach
                Radiation Protection Section
                Division of Health
                Department of Health and Social
                 Services
                P.O. Box 309
                Madison, WI53701-0309
                (608) 267-4796
                1-800-798-9050 in state

Wyoming        Janet Hough
                Wyoming Department of Health and
                 Social Services
                Hathway Building, 4th Floor
                Cheyenne, WY 82002-0710
                (307)777-6015
                1-800-458-5847 in state
                                               11-32       Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
                            STATE  GEOLOGICAL SURVEYS
                                            May, 1993
Alabama        Ernest A. Mancini
               Geological Survey of Alabama
               P.O. Box 0
               420 Hackberry Lane
               Tuscaloosa. AL 35486-9780
               (205) 349-2852

Alaska         Thomas E. Smith
               Alaska Division of Geological &
                 Geophysical Surveys
               794 University Ave., Suite 200
               Fairbanks, AK 99709-3645
               (907)479-7147

Arizona         Larry D. Fellows
               Arizona Geological Survey
               845 North Park Ave., Suite 100
               Tucson, AZ 85719
               (602) 882-4795
Arkansas        Norman F. Williams
               Arkansas Geological Commission
               Vardelle Parham Geology Center
               3815 West Roosevelt Rd.
               Little Rock, AR 72204
               (501) 324-9165

California       James F. Davis
               California Division of Mines &
                 Geology
               801 K Street, MS 12-30
               Sacramento, CA 95814-3531
               (916)445-1923

Colorado        Pat Rogers (Acting)
               Colorado Geological Survey
               1313 Sherman St., Rm 715
               Denver, CO 80203
               (303)866-2611

Connecticut     Richard C. Hyde
               Connecticut Geological & Natural
                 History Survey
               165 Capitol Ave., Rm. 553
               Hartford, CT 06106
               .(203) 566-3540

Delaware        Robert R. Jordan
               Delaware Geological Survey
               University of Delaware
               101 Penny Hall
               Newark, DE19716-7501
               (302) 831-2833
        Walter Schmidt
        Florida Geological Survey
        903 W. Tennessee Su
        Tallahassee, FL 32304-7700
        (904)4884191
Georgia  William H. McLemore
        Georgia Geologic Survey
        Rm. 400
        19 Martin Luther King Jr. Dr. SW
        Atlanta, GA 30334
        (404)656-3214

 Hawaii  Manabu Tagomori
        Dept. of Land and Natural Resources
        Division of Water & Land Mgt
        P.O. Box 373
        Honolulu, ffl 96809
        (808) 548-7539
        Earl H. Bennett
        Idaho Geological Survey
        University of Idaho
        Morrfll Hall, Rm. 332
        Moscow, ID 83843
        (208) 885-7991
Illinois  Morris W. Leighton
        Illinois State Geological Survey
        Natural Resources Building
        615EastPeabodyDr.
        Champaign, IL 61820
        (217) 333-4747
Norman C, Hester.
Indiana Geological Survey
611 North Walnut Grove
Bloomington, IN 47405
(812) 855-9350

Donald L. Koch
Iowa Department of Natural Resources
Geological Survey Bureau
109 Trowbridge Hall
Iowa City, IA 52242-1319
(319)335-1575

Lee C.Gerhard
Kansas Geological Survey
1930 Constant Ave., West Campus
University of Kansas
Lawrence, KS 66047
(913) 864-3965
 Kansas
                                              H-33
  Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Marland
Michigan
Minnesota
Donald C. Haney
Kentucky Geological Survey
University of Kentucky
228 Mining & Mineral Resources
  Building
Lexington, KY 40506-0107
(606)257-5500

William E. Marsalis
Louisiana Geological Survey
P.O. Box-2827
University Station
Baton Rouge, LA 70821-2827
(504)388-5320

Walter A. Anderson
Maine Geological Survey
Department of Conservation
State House, Station 22
Augusta, ME 04333
(207)289-2801
Emery T. Cleaves
Maryland Geological Survey
2300 St. Paul Street
Baltimore, MD 21218-5210
(410) 554-5500
Joseph A. Sinnott
Massachusetts Office of
  Environmental Affairs
100 Cambridge St. Room 2000
Boston, MA 02202
(617) 727-9800

R. Thomas Segall
Michigan Geological Survey Division
Box 30256
Lansing, Ml 48909
(517) 334-6923

Priscilla C. Grew
Minnesota Geological Survey
2642 University Ave.
St. Paul, MN 551 14-1057
($12) 627-4780
S. Cragin Knox
Mississippi Office of Geology
P.O. Box 20307
Jackson, MS 39289-1307
(601) 961-5500
      •Missouri James H. Williams
               Missouri Division of Geology &
                 Land Survey
               111 Fairgrounds Road
               P.O. Box 250
               Rolla, MO 65401
               (314) 368-2100

      Montana Edward T.Ruppel
               Montana Bureau of Mines & Geology
               Montana College of Mineral Science
                 and Technology, Main Hall
               Butte,MT 59701
               (406)4964180

      Nebraska Perry B, Wigley
               Nebraska Conservation & Survey
                 Division
               113 Nebraska Hall
               University of Nebraska
               Lincoln, ME 68588-0517
               (402)472-2410

       Nevada Jonathan G. Price
               Nevada Bureau of Mines & Geology
               Stop 178
               University of Nevada-Reno
               Reno, NV 89557-0088
               (702) 784-6691.

New Hampshire EugeneL.Boudette
               DepL of Environmental Services
               117 James Hall
               University of New Hampshire
               Durham, NH 03824-3589
               (603)862-3160

    New Jersey Haig F. Kasabach
               New Jersey Geological Survey
               P.O. Box 427
               Trenton, NJ 08625
               (609)292-1185

   New Mexico Charles E. Chapin
               New Mexico Bureau of Mines &
                 Mineral Resources
               Campus Station
               Socorro.NM 87801
               (505)835-5420

     New York Robert H. Fakundiny
               New York State Geological Survey
               3136 Cultural Education Center
               Empire State Plaza
               Albany, NY  12230
               (518)474-5816-
                                11-34      Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
 North Carolina  Charles H. Gardner   .
               North Carolina Geological Survey
               P.O. Box 27687
               Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
               (919)733-3833

North Dakota    John P. Bluemle
               North Dakota Geological Survey
               600 East Blvd.
               Bismarck, ND 58505-0840
               (701)224,4109
               Thomas M. Berg
               OMo Dept. of Natural Resources
               Division of Geological Survey
               4383 Fountain Square Drive
               Columbus, OH 43224-1362
               (614) 265-6576
Oklahoma      Charles J. Mankin
               Oklahoma Geological Survey
               Room N-131, Energy Center
               100E.Boyd
               Norman, OK 73019-0628
               (405)325-3031

Oregon         Donald A, Hull
               Dept of Geology & Mineral Indust.
               Suite 965
               800 NE Oregon St. #28
               Portland, OR 97232-2162
               (503)731-4600

Pennsylvania    Donald M. Hoskins
               Dept. of Environmental Resources
               Bureau of Topographic & Geologic
                 Survey
               P.O. Box 2357
               Harrisburg,PA 17105-2357
               (717) 787-2169

Puerto Rico     Ramdn M. Alonso
               Puerto Rico Geological Survey
                 Division
               Box 5887
               Puerta de Tierra Station
               San Juan, P.R. 00906
               (809) 722-2526

Rhode Island    J. Allan Cain
               Department of Geology
               University of Rhode Island
               315 Green Hall
               Kingston, RI02881
               (401) 792-2265
South Carolina Alan-Jon W. Zupan (Acting)
              South Carolina Geological Survey
              5 Geology Road
              Columbia, SC 29210-9998
              (803)737-9440

 South Dakota CM. Christensen (Acting)
              South Dakota Geological Survey
              Science Center
              University of South Dakota
              Vermfflon, SD 57069-2390
              (605)677-5227

    Tennessee Edward T.Luther
              Tennessee Division of Geology
              13th Floor, L & C Tower
              401 Church Street
              NashvUle, TN 37243-0445
              (615) 532-1500
Texas
              William L. Fisher
              Texas Bureau of Economic Geology
              University of Texas
              University Station, Box X
              Austin, TX  78713-7508
              (512)471-7721

              M. Lee Allison
              Utah Geological & Mineral Survey
              2363 S. Foothill Dr.
              Salt Lake City, UT 84109-1491
              (801)467-7970
     Vermont Diane L. Conrad
              Vermont Division of Geology and
                Mineral Resources
              103 South Main St
             ' Waterbury.VT 05671
              (802)244-5164
      Virginia Stanley S. Johnson
              Virginia Division of Mineral
                Resources
              P.O. Box 3667
              Charlottesville, VA 22903
              (804)293-5121
   Washington Raymond Lasmanis
              Washington Division of Geology &
                Earth Resources
              Department of Natural Resources
              P.O. Box 47007
              Olympia, Washington 98504-7007
              (206)902-1450
                                               H-35
        Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
        irginia Larry D.Woodfoik
               West Virginia Geological and
                 Economic Survey
               Mont Chateau Research Center
               P.O. Box 879
               Morgantown,WV 26507-0879
               (304)394-2331
Wisconsin      James Robertson
               Wisconsin Geological & Natural
      . •   ' ". ,    History Survey
               3817 Mineral Point Road
               Madison, WI 53705-5100
               (608)263-7384

Wyoming      Gary B. Glass
               Geological Survey of Wyoming
               University of Wyoming
               Box 3008, University Station
               Laramie, WY 82071-3008
               (307)766-2286
                                              n-36
Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
              EPA REGION 4 GEOLOGIC RADON POTENTIAL SUMMARY
                                          by
             Linda C.S. Gundersen, James K. Otton, andR. Randall Schumann
                                 UJS. Geological Survey

       EPA Region 4 includes the states of Alabama, Honda, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi,
North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee. For each state, geologic radon potential areas
were delineated and ranked on the basis of geologic, sol, housing construction, and other factors.
Areas in which the average screening indoor radon level of all homes within the area is estimated to
be greater than 4 pCi/ETwere ranked* high. Areas in which the average screening indoor" radon
level of all homes within the area is estimated to be between 2 and 4 pQ/L were ranked
moderate/variable, and areas in which the average screening indoor radon level of all homes within
the area is estimated to be less than 2 pCi/L were ranked low. Information on the data used and on
the radon potential ranking scheme is given in the introduction to this volume. More detailed
information on the geology and radon potential of each state in Region 4 is-given in the individual
state chapters. The individual chapters describing the geology and radon potential of (he states in
EPA Region 4, though much more detailed than this summary, still are generalized assessments
and there is no substitute for having a home tested. Within any radon potential area homes with
indoor radon levels both above and below the predicted average will likely be found.
       Major geologic/physiographic provinces for Region 4 are shown in figure 1 and are
referred to in the summary that follows.  The moderate climate, use of air conditioning, evaporative
coolers, or open windows for ventilation, and the small proportion of homes with basements
throughout much of Region 4 contribute to generally low indoor radon levels in spite of the fact
that this area has substantial areas of high surface radioactivity.
       Maps showing arithmetic means of measured indoor radon levels are shown in figure 2.
Indoor radon data  for Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina,
and Tennessee are from the State/EPA Residential Radon Survey. Data for Florida are from the
Florida Statewide Radon  Study. County screening indoor radon averages range from less than 1
pCi/L to 4.6 pCi/L. The geologic radon potential areas in Region 4 have been summarized from
the individual state chapters and are shown in figure 3.

ALABAMA                                                               .

The Plateaus
       The Interior Low Plateaus have been ranked high in geologic radon potential. The
Mississippian carbonate rocks and shales that underlie this province appear to have high (>2.5 ppm
ell) to moderate (1.5-2.5 ppm eU) radioactivity associated with them. The carbonates and shales
are also associated with most of the highest county indoor radon averages for the State, particularly
in Colbert, Madison, Lawrence, and Lauderdale Counties. The geologic units that may  be the
source of these problems, as indicated by the radioactivity, appear to be parts of the Fort Payne
Chert, the Tuscumbia Limestone, the Monteagle, Bangor, Pride Mountain, and Parkwood
Formations, and the Floyd Shale. Indoor radon levels in homes built on the St. Genevieve
Limestone, Tuscumbia Limestone, and Fort Payne Chert averaged between 3.0 and 4.3 pCi/L.
Soils developed from carbonate rocks are often elevated in uranium and radium. Carbonate soils
are derived from the dissolution of the CaCOs that .makes up the majority of the rock. When the
       has been dissolved away, the soils are enriched in the remaining impurities, predominantly
                                          ffl-1    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
Figure 1.  Geologic radon potential areas of EPA Region 4. See next page for names of
numbered areas.

-------
Figure 1 (continued). Geologic radon potential areas of EPA Region 4. Note: although some
areas, for example, the Coastal Plain, are contiguous from state to state, they are sometimes
referred to by slightly different names or are subdivided differently in different states, thus are
numbered and labelled seperately on this figure.
1-Jackson Purchase (Coastal Plain)
2-Western Coalfield
3-Mississippian Plateau  _
4-Eastern Pennyroyal
S^few Albany Shale
6-OuterBluegiass
7-InnerBhiegrass
8-Cumberland Plateau (Appalachian Plateau)
9-Mississippi alluvial plain
10-Loess-covered Coastal Plain
11-Eastem Coastal Plain
12-Cherty Highland
13-HighlandRim
14—Nashville Basin
15-Appalachian Plateau
16-Ridge and Valley
17-Unaka Mountains
l&-Blue Ridge Belt
19-Brevard Fault Zone
20-Chauga Belt
21-lnner Piedmont
22-Kings Mountain Belt
23-Dan River Basin
24-Milton Belt
25-Charlotte Belt
26-Carolina Slate Belt
27-Wadesboro sub-basin
28-Sanford-Durham sub-basins
29-Raleigh Belt
30-Eastem Slate Belt
31-Inner Coastal Plain
32-Quter Coastal Plain
33-Jackson Prairies
34-Loess Hills
35-North Central Hills
36-Hatwoods
37-Pontotoc Ridge
38-Black Prairies
39-Tombigbee Hills
40-Coastal Pine Meadows
41-Pine Hills
42-Interior Low Plateaus
43-Inner Coastal Plain (Cretaceous)
44-Northem Piedmont (faults, phylite and granite rocks)
45-Wedowee and Emuckfaw Groups
46-Inner Piedmont/Dadeville Complex
47-Southern Piedmont
48-lnner and Outer Coastal Plain (Tertiary Rocks)
49-Rome-Kingston Thrust Stack
50-Georgiabama Thrust Stack (north of Altotoona Fault)
51-Georgiabama Thrust Stack (south of Allatoona Fault)
52-Little River Thrust Stack
53-Coastal Plain (Cretaceous/Tertiary)
54-Coastal Plain (Quatemary/Pliocene-Pleistocene gravels)
55-Upper Coastal Plain
56-Middle Coastal Plain
57-Lower  Coastal Plain
58-Highlands
59-Lowlands
60-Dade County anomalous area.
                                               m-3     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
                                                                        indoor Radon Screening
                                                                     Measurements: Average (pCi/L)
                                                                               0.0 to 1.9
                                                                               2.0 to 4.0
                                                                               4.1 to 6.0
                                                                               6.1 to 13.8
                                                                               Missing Data
                                                                               or < 5 measurements
Figure 2. Screening indoor radon averages for counties with 5 or more measurements in EPA
Region 4. Data for all states in Region4 except Florida from the State/EPA Residential Radon
Survey. Data for Florida are from the Honda Statewide Radon Study.  Histograms in map
legend show the number of counties in each category.

-------
                                                                   GEOLOGIC
                                                                RADON POTENTIAL

                                                              j   | LOW

                                                              iH MODERATE/VARIABLE

                                                                  HIGH
Figure 3.  Geologic radon potential areas of EPA Region 4. For more detail, refer to individual
state radon potential chapters.

-------
base metals, including uranium. Rinds containing high concentrations of uranium and uranium
minerals can be formed on the surfaces of rocks affected by CaCQg dissolution and testification.
Karst and cave morphology is also thought to promote the flow and accumulation of radon.
Because carbonate soils are clayey, they have a tendency to crack when they dry and may develop
very high permeability from the fractures. Under moist conditions, however, the soils derived
from carbonates have generally low permeability.
       The Appalachian Plateaus region is ranked moderate in radon potential. Indoor radon is
generally low (< 2 pQ/L) to moderate (2-4 pCi/L). Radioactivity is low to moderate and soil
permeability; is moderate. The sandstone of the Pottsville Formation is not noted for being
uranium-bearing, but uraniferous carbonaceous shales interbedded with the sandstone may be the
cause of locally moderate to high (>4 pCi/L) indoor radon. Cullman County had several indoor
radon measurements greater than 4 pCi/L, including one measurement of 19.8 pCi/L, Winston and
Walker Counties also had several indoor radon levels greater than 4 pQ/L in the Alabama
Department of Public Health data set

Valley and Ridge
       The Valley and Ridge province has been ranked moderate in geologic radon potential.
Radioactivity is generally moderate in the Valley and Ridge, with high radioactivity occurring along
the southeastern border with the Piedmont Indoor radon is highly variable, with generally low
county averages and one high county average. Most of the counties had a few readings greater
than 4 pCi/L. The soils of the Valley and Ridge have low to moderate permeability.  The
permeability may be locally high in dry clayey soils and karst areas. Carbonate soils derived from
Cambrian-Ordovician rock units of the Valley and Ridge province cause known indoor radon
problems in eastern Tennessee, western New Jersey, western Virginia, eastern West Virginia and
central and eastern Pennsylvania. Further, the Devonian Chattanooga Shale crops out locally in
parts of the Valley and Ridge. This shale is widely known to be highly uraniferous and has been
identified as a source of high indoor radon in Kentucky.

Piedmont
       Where it is possible to associate high radioactivity and/or high indoor radon levels with
particular areas, parts of the Piedmont have been ranked moderate to high in radon potential.
Radiometric anomalies occur over the Talladega Fault zone, which  separates the Paleozoic
carbonates from the metamorphic rocks. Some of the metamorphic rocks in the Northern
Piedmont, including the Poe Bridge Mountain Group, the Mad Indian Group, parts of the
Wedowee Group, and the Higgins Ferry Group, also have high radioactivity associated with them.
In many cases the radiornetric anomalies appear to be associated with rocks in fault zones, graphitic
schists and phyllites, felsic gneiss, and other granitic rocks. Furthermore, Talladega, Calhoun,
Clebume, and Randolph Counties all have some high indoor radon measurements. Uranium in
graphitic phyllite with an assay value of 0.076 percent UsOg has been,reported from Clebume
County and similar.graphitic phyllites from the Georgia Piedmont average 4.7 ppm uranium.
Graphitic phyllites and schists in other parts of the Piedmont are known sources of radon and have
high indoor radon levels associated with them.  Another source of uranium in Piedmont     •
metamorphic rocks is monazite, which contains high amounts of both uranium and thorium. It is a
common accessory mineral in gneisses and granites throughout the Piedmont and  its resistance to
weathering and high density result in local monazite concentrations in saprolite. A uraniferous
monazite belt that crosses the Piedmont in northern Chambers and Tallapoosa County may provide
                                          m-6    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
a source of radon. Soils of the Northern and Southern Piedmont have moderate to high
permeability, whereas soils developed from mafic rocks of the Dadeville Complex have low
permeability. Because the Dadeville Complex consists primarily of mafic rocks with low
radioactivity and low permeability, the Dadeville Complex was ranked separately from other
Piedmont rocks and is ranked low in geologic radon potential.

CoastalPMn
       More than half of Alabama is covered by the sediments of the Coastal Plain. Indoor radon
levels are generally less than 4 pCi/L and commonly less than 2 pCi/L in this province.  Soil
permeability is variable^fenerally low in clays and moderate to high in silts and sands. A distinct
radiometric high is located over the central belt of marly sandy clay and chalk known as the Selma
Group. Within the Selma Group high radioactivity is associated with the Demopolis Chalk,
Mooreville Chalk, Prairie Bluffs Chalk, and the Ripley Formation in central and western Alabama.
In eastern Alabama and into Georgia these rocks are dominated by the glauconitic sands and clays
of the Providence Sand, Cusseta Sand, and Blufftown Formation. These units have overall
moderate geologic radon potential.
       As part of a study by the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. EPA to assess the radon
potential of the Coastal Plain sediments in the United States, data on radon in soil gas, surface
gamma-ray activity, and soil permeability were collected and examined. Data were collected in the
Alabama Coastal Plain along a transect running from just north of Montgomery, Alabama, to just
south of De Funiak Springs, Florida. The highest soil-gas radon concentrations and equivalent
uranium were found in the Cretaceous Mooreville Chalk, carbonaceous sands and clays of the
Providence Sand, and the glauconitic sands of the Eutaw and Ripley Formations. However,
permeability in many of these units is slow—generally less than IxlO'12 cm2,  and soil-gas radon
was difficult to collect Geologic units that have the lowest soil-gas radon concentrations and eU
include the quartz sands of the Cretaceous Gordo Formation and quartz sands and residuum of the
undifferentiated upper Tertiary sediments.  Low to moderate radon and uranium concentrations
were measured in the glauconitic sands and clays of the Tertiary Porters Creek Formation and in
the glauconitic sands, limestones, and clays of the Tertiary Nanafalia, Lisbon Formation, and the
Tuscahoma Sand. The indoor radon in some counties underlain by the Selma  Group is in the 2-4
pCi/L range with a few measurements greater than 4 pCi/L, higher than in most other parts of the
Alabama Coastal Plain.  High uranium and radon concentrations in the sediments of the Jackson
Group, locally exceeding 8 ppm U, but generally in the 1-4 ppm U range, and high soil-gas radon
concentrations, are associated with faults and oil and gas wells in Choctaw County. Indoor radon
measurements are generally low in these areas, but may be locally high.

FLORIDA

       Florida lies entirely within the Coastal Plain, but there are six distinctive areas in Florida for
which geologic radon potential may be evaluated—the Northern Highlands, Central Highlands, the
Central and Northern Highlands anomalous areas, the Gulf Coastal Lowlands, Atlantic Coastal
Lowlands, and an area here termed the Dade County anomalous area.
       The Northern Highlands province has generally low geologic radon potential. All counties
entirely within this province have average  indoor radon levels less than 1 pCi/L. Leon County
averaged 1.7 and 1.8 pCi/L in the two surveys of the Florida Statewide Radon Study.  Most of
these data likely come from Tallahassee, which lies within an area of moderately elevated eU. This
                                          ffl-7    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
area and those parts of southern Columbia, western Union, and northern Alachua County which
are underlain by phosphatic rocks," and limited areas where coarse gravels occur in river terraces in
the western panhandle, are likely to have elevated radon potential.
       The Central Highlands province has variable geologic radon potential. Generally low
radon potential occurs in low eU areas in the eastern and southern parts of Ms province. Moderate
radon potential occurs in the western part of this province where uraniferous phosphatic rocks are
close to the surface. Localized areas in which uranium contents of soils and shallow subsoils
exceed 100 ppm are likely, and indoor radon levels may exceed 20 pCi/L or more where this
occurs.  Alachua (lies in both the Central and Northern Highlands), Marion, and Sumter Counties
report indoor radon values exceeding 20 pG/L. Excessively well-drained hillslopes may also
contribute to higher radon potential.
       The Gulf Coastal Lowland Province generally has low radon potential. High rainfall and
high water tables cause very moist soils which inhibit radon movement Equivalent uranium is low
in most areas except in some coastal bay areas of western peninsular Florida. Some isolated areas
of elevated radon potential may occur in these areas of higher eU.
       The Atlantic Coastal Lowland area generaEy has low radon potential. High rainfall and
high water tables cause very moist soils that inhibit radon movement Equivalent uranium is low in.
most areas. In some beach sand areas in northern Florida, elevated eU seems to be associated with
heavy minerals; however,  there is no evidence to suggest that elevated indoor radon occurs in these
areas.
       An area in southwestern Bade County, underlain by thin sandy soils covering shallow
limestone bedrock, has equivalent uranium values as high as 3.5 ppm. Unusually high levels of
radium are present in soils formed on the Pleistocene Key Largo Limestone and perhaps on other
rock formations in certain areas of the Florida Keys and in southwestern Dade County. Areas of
elevated eU and elevated indoor radon in Dade County are likely related to these unusual soils.
These soils may be responsible for the modestly elevated eU in soils and for the elevated indoor
radon levels, and they may extend into Collier County as well.

GEORGIA

Piedmont and Blue Ridge
       The oldest rocks in Georgia form the mountains and rolling hills of the Blue Ridge
Province and most of the Piedmont Province. These highly deformed rocks are separated by a
series of thrust faults superimposing groups of older rocks over younger rocks, comprising the
Georgiabama Thrust Stack.  The igneous and metamorphic rocks in the Georgiabama Thrust Stack
north of the Altoona Fault have been ranked moderate overall in geologic radon potential, but the
radon potential of the area is variable.  Mafic rocks are expected to have low radon potential
whereas phyllite, slate, some metagraywacke, granitic gneiss and granite have moderate to high
radon potential. Soil permeability is slow to moderate in most soils. Counties in this area have
average indoor radon levels that vary from low to high (< 1 pCi/L to > 4 pCi/L), but the
measurements are predominantly in the moderate range.  The highest indoor radon reading, 18.7
pCi/L, was measured in the northern Blue Ridge in Fannin County, which is underlain
predominantly by  metagraywacke, slate, phyllite, and mica schists. Equivalent uranium
concentrations in rocks and soils of this area are moderate to high.
       The Georgiabama Thrust Stack south  of the Alatoona Fault  has also been ranked moderate
in geologic radon potential. The majority of this part of the'Georgiabama Thrust Stack is underlain
                                          m-8     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
by schist and ampMbolite of the Zebulon sheet, which have generally low radioactivity where not
intruded by granites or where not highly sheared, particularly south of the Towalga Fault  An area
with distinctly low aeroradiometric readings which is underlain by mafic metamorphic rocks lies
between the Brevard and Allatoona Faults in the northwestern Georgiabama Thrust Stack. All of
these rocks have slow to moderate permeability, and indoor radon values are generally low to
moderate. A central zone of biotite gneiss, granitic gneiss, and granite has elevated uranium
concentrations and high equivalent uranium (>2.5 ppm) on the NURE map. Soil permeability is
generally low to locally moderate.  Indoor radon levels are generally moderate.  Recent soil-gas
radon studies in the Brevard zone and surrounding rocks show that this zone may yield unusually
high soil-gas radon where the zone crosses the Ben Hill and Palmetto granites.  Surface gamma-
ray spectrometer measurements yielded equivalent uranium from 4 to 17 ppm over granite and
granitic biotite gneiss (Lithonia gneiss).  Soil-gas radon concentrations commonly exceeded 2,000
pQ/L and the highest soil-gas radon measured was 26,000 pCi/L in faulted Ben Hill granite.
Undeformed Lithonia gneiss had average soil radon of more than 2,000 pQ/L.  Mica schist
averaged less than 1,000 pCi/L where it is undeformed. The Stone Mountain granite and mafic
rocks yielded low soil-gas radon. The Grenville Basement granite and granite gneiss have
moderate to locally high radon potential. Radioactivity is generally moderate to high and soil
permeability is generally moderate.
       The Little River Thrust Stack is generally low to moderate in geologic radon potential.  It is
underlain primarily by mafic metamorphic rocks with low radon potential, but each belt contains
areas of rocks with moderate to locally high radon potential. Metadacites have moderate radon
potential and moderate radioactivity.  Faults and shear zones have local areas of mineralization and
locally high permeability. Granite intrusives may also have moderate radon potential.
Aeroradioactivity is generally low and soil permeability is generally moderate.

Ridge and Valley
       The Rome-Kingston Thrust Stack is ranked low in geologic radon potential; however,
some of the limestones and  shales in this area may have moderate to high radon potential. Indoor
radon is variable but generally low to moderate. Permeability of the soils is low to moderate.
Equivalent uranium is moderate to locally high, especially along the Carters Dam and Emerson
faults.  Carbonate soils of the Valley and Ridge Province are likely to cause indoor radon
problems. The Devonian Chattanooga Shale, which crops out locally in parts of the Valley and
Ridge, is highly uraniferous and has been identified as a source of high indoor radon levels in
Kentucky. Numerous gamma radioactivity anomalies are associated with the Pennington
Formation, Bangor Limestone, Fort Paine Chert, Chattanooga Shale, Floyd Shale, the Knox
Group, and the Rome Formation.

Appalachian Plateau
       The Appalachian Plateau has been ranked low in geologic radon potential. Sandstone is the
dominant rock type and it generally has low uranium concentrations. • Equivalent uranium is low to
moderate. Permeability of the soils is moderate and indoor radon levels are low.

Coastal Plain
       The Coastal Plain has been ranked low in radon potential, but certain areas of the Coastal
Plain in which glauconitic, carbonaceous, and phosphatic sediments are abundant may have
moderate geologic radon potential. The highest soil-gas radon concentrations (>1000 pCi/L) and
                                          ffl-9    Reprinted firom USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
 equivalent uranium (eU) concentrations (>2 ppm) in studies of radon in soil-gas in the Coastal
 Plain of Alabama were found in the carbonaceous sands and clays of the Providence Sand and the
 glauconMc sands of the Eutaw and Ripley Formations. Low to moderate soil-gas radon and
 uranium concentrations were measured in the glauconitic sands, limestones, and clays of the
 Tertiary Nanafalia and Lisbon Formations, and the Tuscahoma Sand, Equivalent rock units in
 Georgia are also likely to be sources of high radon levels. Equivalent uranium is moderate in the
 Cretaceous and Tertiary-age sediments and low, with local highs, in the Quaternary sediments.
 Radioactivity highs in much of the Coastal Plain are related to phosphate and heavy-mineral
 concentrations. In the shoreline complexes and in several sediment units such as the Hawthorn
 Formation, the phosphate concentrations are naturally occurring. In the Black Lands and in many
 portions of the central Coastal Plain that have abundant agricultural activity, the radioactivity may
 be related to the use of phosphate fertilizers. Indoor radon in the Coastal Plain is generally low.

 KENTUCKY
       Three primary areas in Kentucky are identified as being underlain by rock types and
 geologic features suspected of producing elevated radon levels: (1) areas underlain by Devonian
 black shales in the Outer Bluegrass region;  (2) areas underlain by the Ordovician Lexington
 Limestone, particularly the Tanglewood Member, in the Inner Bluegrass region; and (3) areas of
1 the Mississippian Plateau underlain by karsted limestones or black shales.  In addition, some
 homes underlain by, or in close proximity to, major faults in the Western Coalfield and Inner
 Bluegrass regions may have locally elevated indoor radon levels due to localized concentrations of
 radioactive minerals and higher permeability in fault and fracture zones.
 Appalachian Plateau
       The black shale and limestone areas in the Mississippian Plateau region have associated
 high surface radioactivity, and the Western Coalfield contains scattered radioactivity anomalies.
 The arcuate pattern of radioactivity anomalies along the southern edge of the Outer Bluegrass
 region corresponds closely to the outcrop pattern of the New Albany Shale. A group of
 radiometric  anomalies in the vicinity of Warren and Logan counties appears to correspond to
 outcrops of the Mississippian Ste. Genevieve and St Louis Limestones.  The clastic sedimentary
 rocks of the Cumberland Plateau region are characterized by relatively low surface radioactivity and
 generally have low indoor radon levels.
       Li the Mississippian Plateau Region, locally elevated indoor radon levels are likely in areas
 with high soil permeability, solution cavities; Or localized concentrations of radioactive minerals in
 karst regions, and in areas underlain black shale along the State's southern border.  Of particular
 concern are  the Devonian-Mississippian Chattanooga Shale (equivalent to the New Albany Shale),
 limestones in the Mississippian Fort Payne Formation, and the Mississippian Salem, Warsaw,
 Harrodsburg, St. Louis, and Ste. Genevieve Limestones in south-central Kentucky.
       Caves, produced by limestone solution and relatively common in central Kentucky, are
 natural concentrators of radon and can be a local source of high radon levels. Levels of radon
 decay products approaching a maximum of-2.0-working levels (WL), which corresponds to about
 400 pCi/L of radon (assuming that radon and its decay products are in 50 percent equilibrium), and
 averaging about 0.70 WL, or about 140 pCi/L of radon, have been recorded in Mammoth Cave.
 Although these levels are not considered hazardous if the exposure is of short duration, such as
 would be experienced by a visitor to the cave, it could be of concern to National Park Service
 employees and other persons that spend longer periods of time in the caves. Another potential
 hazard is the use of cave air for building air temperature control, -as was formerly done at the
                                           m-10    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
Mammoth Cave National Park visitor center. The cave air, which averages 54°F, was pumped into
the visitor center for cooling, but this process has been discontinued due to the relatively high
radioactivity associated with the cave air.

Coastal Plain
       The majority of homes in the Jackson Purchase Region (Coastal Plain) have low indoor
radon levels, although the area is underlain in part by loess with an ell signature in the 2.0-3.0
ppm range. The poor correspondence with surface radioactivity in this area appears to be due to a
combination of low soil permeability and high water tables. The Coastal Plain is the only part of
the State in which seasonal high water tables were consistently listed in the SCS soil surveys as
less than 6 ft, and commonly less than 2 ft

MISSISSIPPI

       Examination of the available data reveals that Mississippi is generally, an area of low radon
potential. Indoor radon levels in Mississippi are generally low; however, several counties had
individual homes with radon levels greater than 4 pQ/L. Counties with maximum levels greater
than 4 pCi/L are concentrated in the northeastern part of the State within the glauconitic and
phosphatic sediments of the Tombigbee Hills and Black Prairies. Readings greater than 4 pCi/L
also occur in the Mississippi Alluvial Plain, the eastern part of the Pine Hills Province, and in
loess-covered areas. Glauconitic and phosphatic sediments of the Coastal Plain, particularly the
Cretaceous and lower Tertiary-age geologic units located in the northeastern portion of the State,
have some geologic potential to produce radon. Based on radioactivity and studies of radon in
other parts of the Coastal Plain, the Black Prairies and Pontotoc Ridge have been assigned
moderate geologic radon potential; all other parts of Mississippi are considered to be low in
geologic radon potential. The climate, soil, and lifestyle of the inhabitants of Mississippi have
influenced building construction styles and building ventilation which, in general, do not allow
high concentrations of radon to accumulate.

Coastal Plain
       A study of the radon in the Coastal Plain of Texas, Tennessee, and Alabama suggests that
glauconitic, phosphatic, and carbonaceous sediments and sedimentary rocks, equivalent to those in
Mississippi, can cause elevated levels of indoor radon. Ground-based surveys of radioactivity and
radon in soils in that study indicate that the Upper Cretaceous through Lower Tertiary Coastal Plain
sediments are sources of high soil-gas radon (> 1,000 pCi/L) and soil uranium concentrations.
The high equivalent uranium found over the Coastal Plain sediments in northeastern Mississippi
supports the possibility .of a similar source of high radon levels. Chalks, clays and marls tend to
have low permeability when moist and higher permeability when dry due to desiccation fractures
and joints.
       The youngest Coastal Plain sediments, particularly Oligocene  and younger, have
decreasing amounts of glauconite and phosphate and become increasingly siliceous and therefore
less likely to be significant sources of radon. Some carbonaceous units may be  possible radon
sources.
       Loess in Tennessee, and probably elsewhere, is known to generate high levels of radon in
both dry and saturated soils.  Both thin and thick loess units can easily be traced on the
                                          ffl-11    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
radioactivity map of Mississippi by following the highest of the moderate equivalent uranium
anomalies. Loess tends to have low permeability when moist and higher permeability when dry,

Mississippi Alluvial Plain
       The Mississippi Alluvial Plain contains several areas with locally high eU, as well as
having moderate radioactivity overall. These high eU areas are located close to the river in Bolivar
and Washington Counties. The highest indoor radon level recorded in Mississippi in the
State/fiPA Residential Radon Survey (22.8 pQ/L) occurs within Bolivar County and the second
highest radon level of homes measured to date in the State (16.1 pQ/L) occurs in Washington
County, It is not apparent from the data available whether the high eU and indoor radon levels are
correlative, and only a few indoor radon readings in each county are greater than 4 pCi/L. The
geology of the region is not generally conducive to high uranium concentrations, except possibly in
heavy-mineral placer deposits. Further, elevated radioactivity in the Mississippi Alluvial Plain may
be due in part to uranium in phosphatic fertilizers.  Locally high soil permeability in some of the
alluvial sediments may allow locally high indoor radon levels to occur.
       The southeastern half of Mississippi has low radioactivity and low indoor radon levels.
The few indoor radon readings greater than 4 pCi/L were between 4.1 and 5.8 pCi/L. The lowest
eU is associated with the coastal deposits and the Citronelle Formation, which are predominantly
quartz sands with low radon potential. Slightly higher eU, though still low overall, is associated
with the Pascagoula and Hattiesburg Formations and Catahoula Formation. Soils .in this area are
variably poorly to well drained with slow to moderate permeabilities.
       The Chattanooga Shale and related sedimentary rocks in the northeastern part of the State
have the potential to be sources of high indoor radon levels. In Tennessee and Kentucky, the
Chattanooga Shale has high uranium concentrations and is associated with high  indoor radon levels
in those states. The extent of these rocks in Mississippi is minor.

NORTH CAROLINA

Blue Ridge
       The Blue Ridge has been ranked moderate overall in geologic radon potential, but it is
actually variably moderate to high in radon potential. The province has highly variable geology
and because of the constraints imposed by viewing the indoor radon data at the county level, it is
impossible to assign specific geologic areas of the Blue Ridge to specific moderate or high indoor
radon levels. Average indoor radon levels are moderate (2-4 pCi/L) in the majority of counties.
However, two counties have indoor radon averages between 4.1 and 6 pCi/L (Cherokee and
Buncomb Counties) and three counties in the northern Blue Ridge (Alleghany, Watauga, and
Mitchell) have indoor radon averages greater than 6 pCi/L. These three counties are generally
underlain by granitic gneiss, mica schist, and minor amphibolite and phyllite. Transylvania and
Henderson Counties, which are underlain by parts of the Blue Ridge and Inner Piedmont, also
have indoor radon averages .greater than 6 pCi/L.  The Brevard fault zone, Henderson Gneiss, and
Ceasars Head Granite are possible sources of high indoor radon in these two counties. Equivalent
uranium is variable from low to high in the Blue Ridge. The highest eU appears to be associated
with the Ocoee Supergroup in the southern Blue Ridge, rocks in the Grandfather Mountain
Window, and metamorphic rocks in parts of Haywood and Buncomb Counties. Soils are
generally moderate  in permeability.
                                          ffl-12   Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
       The Chauga belt and Brevard fault zone are ranked high in geologic radon potential. The
Chauga belt consists predominantly of the Henderson Gneiss, High eU and high uranium in
stream sediments appears to be associated with the Brevard fault zone, Henderson Gneiss, and
Ceasars Head Granite in this area. Average indoor radon levels in the two counties that the main
part of the Chauga belt and the southern portion of the Brevard fault zone passes through are high.
The soils have moderate permeability.

Piedmont
       The Inner Piedmont and Kings Mountain belts have been ranked moderate in geologic
radon potential. Indoofifadon levels are generally moderate.  Granitic plutons, granitic gneiss,
monazite-rich gneiss and schist, pegmatites, and fault zones appear to have high eU and high
uranium concentrations in stream sediment samples.  Many of the granitic plutons are known to be
enriched in uranium and recent studies suggest that the soils developed on many of the uraniferous
granitic plutons and related fault zones in the Blue Ridge and Piedmont are possible sources of
radon. Measured soil-gas radon concentrations commonly exceeded 1,000-pCi/L in soils
developed on the Cherryville Granite, Rolesville Suite, and the Sims, Sandy Mush, and Castalia
plutons.  Soils developed on the Rocky Mount, Spruce Pine, Toluca, Mt. Airy, and Stone
Mountain plutons had relatively low soil-gas radon concentrations. Soil permeabilities in the Inner
Piedmont, Brevard fault zone, and Kings Mountain belt are variably low to moderate which,
together with the large proportion of homes without basements, may account for the abundance of
moderate indoor radon levels.
       Most shear zones in the Piedmont and Blue Ridge should be regarded as having the
potential  to produce very localized moderate to high indoor radon levels. Geochemical and
structural models developed from studies of shear zones in granitic metamorphic and igneous rocks
from the Reading Prong in New York to the Piedmont in Virginia indicate that uranium
enrichment, the redistribution of uranium into the rock foliation during deformation, and high
radon emanation, are common to most shear zones. Because they are very localized sources of
radon and uranium, shear zones may not always be detected by radiometric or stream sediments
surveys.
       The Charlotte belt has been ranked low in geologic radon potential but it is actually quite
variable-dominantly low in the southern portion of the belt and higher in the northern portion of
the belt  Equivalent uranium is generally low, with locally high eU occurring in the central and
northern portions of the belt, associated with the Concord and Salisbury Plutonic Suites.
Permeability of the soils is generally low to moderate and indoor radon levels are generally low.
       The Carolina slate belt has been ranked low in radon potential where it is underlain
primarily by metavolcanic rocks. Where it crops out  east of the Mesozoic basins it has been ranked
moderate. Aerpradioactivity over the Carolina slate belt, uranium in stream sediment samples, and
indoor radon levels are markedly low.  Permeability of many  of the metavolcanic units is generally
low to locally moderate.  East of the Wadesboro subbasin in Anson and Richmond Counties lies a
small area of the slate belt that is intruded by the LUesville Granite and Peedee Gabbro. It has high
eU and high uranium concentrations in stream sediments, and moderate to high permeability in the
soils, and is a likely source of moderate to high indoor radon levels.
       The Raleigh belt has been ranked moderate in geologic radon potential.  Equivalent uranium
in the Raleigh belt is generally moderate to high and appears to be associated with granitic intrusive
rocks, including the Castalia and Wilton plutons and the Rolesville Suite.  A belt of monazite-
bearing rocks also passes through the Raleigh belt and may account for part of the observed high
                                          m-13    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D.

-------
radioactivity. Soils have variably low to moderate permeability. Indoor radon levels are generally
moderate.

Coastal Plain
       In the Coastal Plain province, moderate to high eU is associated with the Cretaceous and
Tertiary sediments of the Inner Coastal Plain. Permeability of the soils is highly variable but
generally moderate to low, and may be locally high in sands and gravels. Seasonally high water
tables are common. Indoor radon levels in the Coastal Plain are generally low. The Inner Coastal
Plain is ranked low in geologic radon potential but may be locally moderate to high, especially in
areas underlain by Cretaceous sediments.  Glauconitic, phosphatic, monaate-rich, and
carbonaceous sediments and sedimentary rocks in the Coastal Plain of Texas, New Jersey, and
Alabama, similar to some Coastal Plain sediments in North Carolina, are the source for moderate
indoor radon levels seen in parts of the Inner Coastal Plain of these states.
       The Outer Coastal Plain has low eU, low indoor radon levels, and is generally underlain by
sediments with low uranium concentrations. Soil permeability is variable but generally moderate.
Seasonally high water tables are common.  A few isolated areas of high radioactivity in the Outer
Coastal Plain may be related to heavy mineral and phosphate deposits in the shoreline sediments.   .
The area has been ranked low in geologic radon potential, but may have local moderate or high
indoor radon occurrences related to heavy minerals or phosphate deposits.

SOOTH CAROLINA

Blue Ridge and Piedmont
       The Blue Ridge and Piedmont Provinces have moderate geologic radon potential. Possible
sources of radon include uraniferous granites, biotite and granitic gneiss, and shear zones. Soils
developed on many of the uraniferous granitic plutons and some fault zones within the Piedmont
and Blue Ridge of North and South Carolina yield high soil-gas radon (>1,000 pQ/L). In the
Blue Ridge, sheared graphitic rocks may be a local source for high indoor radon concentrations.
       More than 10 percent of the homes tested in Greenville and Oconee Counties, in the Blue
Ridge and Piedmont, have indoor radon levels greater than 4 pCi/L. Greenville County also has
the highest indoor radon measurement in the State, 80.7 pCi/L, the highest radioactivity, associated
with the Silurian-Devonian Ceasers Head Granitic Gneiss, and with biotite gneiss in the Carolina
monazite belt. In Oconee County, the Toxaway Gneiss and graphitic rocks in the Brevard Fault
Zone may account for the higher incidence of indoor radon levels exceeding 4 pCi/L and the higher
overall indoor radon average of the county. Average indoor radon levels in the Blue Ridge and
Piedmont are generally higher than in the rest of the State, and moderate to high radioactivity is
common. Most of the soils formed on granitic rocks have moderate permeability and do not
represent an impediment to radon mobility. Mafic rocks in the Blue Ridge and Piedmont have low
radon potential. These rocks have low concentrations of uranium, and soils formed from them
have low permeability.

Coastal Plain
       In the Coastal Plain Province, moderate to high radioactivity is associated with the
Cretaceous and Tertiary sediments of the upper Coastal Plain. Glauconitic, phosphatic, monazite-
rich, and carbonaceous sediments and sedimentary-rocks in the Coastal Plain of Texas, New
Jersey, and Alabama, similar to some of those in South Carolina, cause elevated levels of indoor
                                          ffl-14   Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
radon. Orangeburg County is the only other county besides Greenville .and Oconee Counties that
has an average indoor radon level greater than 2 pCi/L. It is underlain by Lower Tertiary
sediments in an extremely dissected part of the Coastal Plain. Radioactivity is moderate to low.
Soils are highly variable in the county because of the complicated erosion patterns.  The few high
values of indoor radon for this county create an overall higher indoor radon average for the county.
These locally high readings may be due to local accumulations of monazite, glauconite, or
phosphate that can occur within these particular sediments.
       The lower Coastal Plain has low to locally high radioactivity and low indoor radon levels.
Most of the sediments have low uranium concentrations with the exception of the uraniferous,
phosphatic sediments ofthe Cooper Group and local, heavy-mineral placer deposits within some
of the Quaternary units. The area has been ranked low in geologic radon potential overall, but the
radon potential may be locally high in areas underlain by these uraniferous sediments,

TENNESSEE

Coastal Plain and Mississippi Alluvial Plain
       The Mississippi Alluvial Plain has low geologic radon potential. The high soil moisture,
high water tables, and the lack of permeable soils lower the radon potential in spite of moderate eU
values.  Some areas with very sandy or excessively-drained soils may cause homes to have indoor .
radon levels exceeding 4 pG/L.
       The loess-covered parts of the Coastal Plain have low radon potential in spite of moderate
eU values and elevated soil-gas radon concentrations. The radon potential is lowered by the high
moisture content and low permeability of the soils. The lack of basements in homes also lowers
the potential. If prolonged dry periods were to occur in this area, some homes might see a
significant increase in indoor radon, especially those with basements or crawl spaces. The eastern
Coastal Plain has moderate geologic radon potential. NURE data show elevated eU values
compared to the rest of the Coastal Plain. Soil-gas radon levels are locally elevated.

Highland Rim and Nashville Basin
       The Highland Rim  and Nashville Basin are underlain by sedimentary rocks of Paleozoic
age, principally limestone, shale, chert, and dolostone. The part of the Highland Rim that is
underlain by cherty limestone (Fort Payne Formation) has high geologic radon potential. This area
has moderate to locally high eU and soils that are cherty and excessively well drained.  The
limestone and shale part of the Highland Rim has moderate radon potential. The Nashville Basin
has high geologic radon potential.  The elevated eU, the presence of abundant phosphatic soils,
local karst, and the presence of generally well-drained soils all contribute to this high geologic
radon potential.  Very'high (>20 pCi/L) to extreme indoor radon values (>200 pCi/L) are possible
where homes are sited on soils developed on the Chattanooga shale, on phosphate-rich residual
soils, or on karst pinnacles.

Appalachian Plateau
       Sandstones and shales underlie most of the Appalachian  Plateau, which generally has
moderate geologic radon potential. These rocks are typically not good sources of radon and values
for eU are among the lowest in the State. However, many sandy, well-drained to excessively-  .
drained soils are present in this region, and may be a source of locally elevated radon levels
because of their high permeability.
                                          ffl-15    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
Ridge and Valley
       Folded and faulted Paleozoic limestone, shale, chert, dolostone, and sandstone underlie
most of the Ridge and Valley region, with sandstone and eherty dolostone forming most of the
ridges and limestone and shale forming most of the valleys. The Ridge and Valley region has high
geologic radon potential because of elevated eU values, karst, and well drained soils. Very high
(>20 pQ/L) to extteme indoor radon values (>200 pQ/L) are possible where homes are sited on
soils developed on black shales, phosphate-rich residual soils, or karst pinnacles. Homes with
basements are more likely to yield elevated indoor radon levels than homes with slab-on-grade
construction.         ~

Unaka Mountains
       The Unaka Mountains are underlain by siltstone, sandstone, conglomerate, quartzite,
phyllite, gneiss, granite, and metamorphosed volcanic rocks of Precambrian and Paleozoic age that
have moderate geologic radon potential. Values of eU are generally moderate, although they are
locally high. Some very high (>20 pQ/L) to extreme (>200 pQ/L) indoor radon levels are
possible where homes are sited on phosphate-rich residual soils developed on phosphatic carbonate
rocks, or on pegmatite in the metamorphic rock areas, but the former are much less common in this
region than in the Nashville Basin and the Ridge and Valley region.
                                         m-16    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
      PRELIMINARY GEOLOGIC RADON POTENTIAL ASSESSMENT OF GEORGIA
                                          by
                        Linda C.S. Gundersen and Joseph P. Smoot
                                UJS. Geological Survey

INTRODUCTION

       A random sampling of indoor radon levels in 1534 homes was conducted in Georgia as
part of the State/EPA Residential Radon Survey during the winter of 1988-89. Indoor radon was
measured by charcoal eanisters and the average for the State was 1.7 pCi/L. Six and one-half
percent of the indoor radon measurements exceeded the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's
guideline of 4 pQ/L, Examination of these data in the context of geology, soil parameters, and
radioactivity suggest that soils and rocks of the Piedmont, Valley and Ridge, and Blue Ridge may
have the potential to produce generally moderate (2-4 pCi/L) to locally high (>4 pCS/L) indoor  .
radon levels. Rock types and soils with moderate to high geologic radon potential include black
shales, soils derived from carbonate rocks, granitic gneiss, graphitic schist and phyllite, and
granite. Soils and rocks of the Coastal Plain are generally low to locally moderate in radon
potential.
       This is a generalized assessment of geologic radon potential of rocks, soils, and surficial
deposits of Georgia. The scale of this assessment is such that it is inappropriate for use in
identifying the radon potential of small areas such as neighborhoods, individual building sites, or
housing tracts. Any localized assessment of radon potential must be supplemented with additional
data and information from the locality.  Within any area of a given radon potential ranking, there
are likely to be areas with higher or lower radon levels than characterized for the area as a whole.
Indoor radon levels, both high and low, can be quite localized, and there is no substitute for testing
individual homes. Elevated levels of indoor radon have been found in every State, and EPA
recommends that all homes be tested.  For more information on radon, the reader is urged to
consult the local or State radon program or EPA regional office.  More detailed information on  state
or local geology may be obtained from the state geological survey. Addresses and phone numbers
for these agencies are listed in chapter 1 of this booklet

GEOGRAPHIC SETTING

       Georgia is divided into five major physiographic provinces: the Appalachian Plateau, the
Valley and Ridge, the Blue Ridge, the Piedmont, and the Coastal Plain (fig. 1). Except for the
Appalachian Plateau, the physiography of each province is subdivided into smaller districts. The
Appalachian Plateau in Georgia is a small area in the northwestern part of the State comprising
Lookout and Sand Mountains and the adjoining Lookout Valley. Elevation varies between 800 and
2000 feet above sea level, with local relief of up to 1200 feet Sandstone caps the mountains and
limestone underlies the valleys.
       The Valley and Ridge Province is divided into three districts: Chickamauga Valley,
Armuchee Ridges, and the Great Valley. Chickamauga Valley is a series of gently rolling,
northeast-trending valleys separated by low, linear ridges. Elevation is 700-1000 feet above sea
level, with local relief of up to 300 feet Limestone underlies the valley floors and ridges are
capped by sandstone and more resistant rock. .The Arrnuchee Ridges are a series of prominent,
steep, narrow ridges capped .by sandstone with intervening valleys of shale and limestone.
                                          IV-l    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
              HT ** *   d
                   " x x*E
               « * » JLA-
xT(L<  y  /
                     s-frs-   /12 y
                J3_

i

1 y^' ^
I "

-~^~ ^




                    miles
               The Appalachian Plateau Province
               (1) Lookout and Sand Mountains, Lookout Valley.
               The Valley  and Ridge Province .
               (2) Chickamauga Valley (3) Annuchee Ridges
               (4) The Great Valley.
               The Blue Ridge Province
              '(5) Cohutta Mountains (6) McCaysville Basin
               (7) Blue Ridge Mountains
                                         The Piedmont  Province
                                         ®j OKrokee Upland (9) Dahlonega Upland
                                         (10) Hightower-Jasper Ridges
                                        (14) Washington Slope (15) Greenville Slope
                                        (lo) Pine Mountain.                  .
                                        The Coastal Plain Province
                                        ,(ffi FaU Ltae ^k (lg) Fon vaUey Plateau
                                        (19) Dougherty Plain,
                                       '<20> Tifton Upland (21) Vidalia Upland
                                        (22) Bacon Tenaces
                                        (23) Okefenokee Basin
                                        (24) Barrier Island Sequence.
Figure 1.  Physiographic provinces and subdivisions of Georgia (modified from Hodler and
Schretter, 1986).

-------
Elevation varies from 900 to 1600 feet above sea level, with local relief of up to 700 feet The
Great Valley is a broad open valley with small scattered hills. The valley is underlain by shale,
dolomite, and limestone. Elevation varies from 700 to 800 feet above sea level with local relief of
as much as 100 feet
       The Blue Ridge Province is divided into three districts: the Cohutta Mountains, the
McCaysville Basin, and the Blue Ridge Mountains. The Cohutta Mountains are underlain by
metamorphic rocks and consist of rugged mountains and deep valleys. Elevation is 1500-4000 feet
above sea level with local relief of up to 2500 feet The McCaysville Basin lies to the east of the
Cohutta Mountains. It is a gently rolling basin with local relief of only 200-300 feet, except where
it is bisected by the Jasper Ridges. Elevation is 1600-1800 feet and the basin is underlain by
metamorphic rocks. The Blue Ridge Mountains are rugged mountains with high elevation, up to
4700 feet above sea level, and local relief of up to 2000 feet Metamorphic and igneous rocks
underlie the steep mountains and deep valleys of this province.
       The Piedmont Province is underlain by metamorphic and igneous rocks.  It separated into
nine districts: The Cherokee Upland, the Dahlonega Upland, the ffightower-Jasper Ridges, the
Central Uplands, the Gainesville  Ridges, the Winder Slope, the Washington Slope, the Greenville
Slope, and Pine Mountain. The Cherokee and Dahlonega Uplands comprise part of the northern
Piedmont These districts are characterized by elevations of 1000-1700 feet above sea level with
local relief up to 600 feet The area is hilly with narrow valleys in the north and wider valleys
toward the south. These two districts are bordered by the Hightower Ridges to the south. The
Jasper Ridges bisect the McCaysville Basin to the north.  The ffightower-Jasper Ridges are a
series of low parallel ridges separated by narrow valleys.  Elevations are the highest of the
Piedmont 1200-2400 feet above sea level, with local relief of up to 800 feet The Central Uplands
and Gainesville Ridges are low ridges separated  by shallow valleys with local reHef of 100-200
feet Valleys are narrow in the Gainesville Ridges and elevations vary from 700  to 1600 feet
Valleys are broad in the Central Uplands and elevation varies from 1100 to 1500 feet The Winder
Slope occupies a large area in northeastern Piedmont It is characterized by a gently rolling surface
with deep narrow stream valleys and dome-shaped granitic mountains. Elevation is 700-1000 feet
with local reHef of up to 200 feet The Washington Slope lies to the south of the  Winder Slope and
has a gentle, undulating surface marked by broad valleys and gentle slopes.  Elevation is lower,
500-700 feet and relief is generally 50-100 feet except along the Oconee River, where relief is up
to 200 feet. The Greenville Slope is characterized by a rolling topography, with open valleys to the
west and narrow valleys to the east Elevation is 600-1000 feet above sea level with local relief of
up to 100 feet Pine Mountain is in the southwest corner of the Piedmont and is marked by Pine-
Oak Mountain, which rises 700 feet above the surrounding area. Elevation varies from 500 to
1300 feet above sea level with local relief of up to 200 feet
       The Coastal Plain Province is subdivided info eight districts: The Fall Line Hills, the Fort
Valley Plateau, The Dougherty Plain, the Tifton Upland, the Vidalia Upland, the Bacon Terraces,
the Okefenokee Basin, and the Barrier Island Sequence. Elevation varies progressively from 750
feet in the Fall Line Hills to sea level at the Gulf and  Atlantic coastlines in the south and east The
Fall Line Hills is a highly dissected hilly area with local relief of 50-250 feet.  The Fort Valley
Plateau is underlain by more clayey sediments than the surrounding Fall Line Hills and is a broad
plateau with little relief.  The Dougherty Plain is a flat to gently rolling lowland with numerous
sinkholes, ponds and marshes formed on the underlying limestone. The Tifton Upland is
characterized by a complicated drainage pattern with narrow stream divides.  The Vidalia Upland is
the largest subdivision of the Coastal Plain. It is a moderately dissected upland underlain by
                                           W-3    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
gravdiy clayey sands. The Bacon Terraces parallel the present coastline.  Long, nairow
inteifluves with gently rounded flat summits rise 50-100 feet above nairow marshy floodplains.
The Okefenokee Basin is a lowland area characterized by the 600-square-mile Okefenokee Swamp.
The Barrier Mand Sequence is characterized by a number of shoreline deposits formed during the
advance and retreat of sea level over time. Subsequently, a step-like progression of deposits with
decreasing elevations have formed parallel to shoreline.
       Thirty-three percent of Georgia's population is settled in the Atlanta metropolitan area and
approximately 70 percent of the State's population is settled north of the Coastal Plain (fig. 2).
The remaining 30 percent of Georgia's population is scattered across the Coastal Plain, including
the population centers of Savannah, Columbus, and Albany. The majority of Georgia's land area
is forested, and commercial lumbering abounds throughout the State.  The Coastal Plain is
dominantly agricultural, whereas north of the Coastal Plain, manufacturing, the service industry,
and government provide the principal Mnds of employment The climate of Georgia is semi-
tropical with hot, humid summers and mild, winters. Precipitation in the State varies from 40-60
inches per year (fig. 3).

GEOLOGIC SETTING

       The geology of Georgia is diverse and varies from the flat-lying marine and fluvial
sequences found in the Coastal Plain to complexly folded and faulted rocks of the Piedmont, Blue
Ridge, and Valley and Ridge. The following descriptions of the geology of Georgia are derived
from Reinhardt and others (1980), Schamel and others (1980), Bearce and others (1982),
McConnell and Abrams (1984), Lindberg (1985), and Higgins and others (1988). A generalized
geologic map is given in figure 4. On the geologic map of Georgia in this booklet, local rock unit
names have not been used and the units have been grouped and described by rock" type for clarity.
The reader should refer to the state geologic map of Georgia (Georgia Department of Natural
Resources, 1976) and other detailed geologic maps and bulletins from the Georgia Geologic
Survey for more information. Georgia has been divided into several tectonic and geologic areas
based on rock type and structure (Higgins and others, 1988). These areas and some of the major
fault zones are shown in figure 5 and their terminology will be used throughout this report.  We
will also refer to the major physiographic provinces (fig. 1) for reference.  The terms Blue Ridge
and Piedmont have also been used in some literature in the Appalachians to refer to geologic
provinces. In this report, Blue Ridge and Piedmont refer to the physiographic areas only.

The Georgiabama Thrust Stack
       The oldest rocks in Georgia form the mountains and rolling hills of the Blue Ridge
Province and most of the Piedmont Province. These highly deformed rocks are separated by a
series of thrust faults superimposing groups of older jocks over younger rocks, comprising the
Georgiabama Thrust Stack, which is bounded to the northwest by the Emerson and Carters Dam
faults and  to the southeast by the Auchumpkee fault  The oldest rocks are Precambrian gneiss,
granite, and schist that form a prominent  east-west trending belt just south of the Towaliga Fault
and a northeasterly-trending belt east of the Towaliga  Fault to Athens. North of the Allatoona Fault
are Precambrian mica schist, metagraywacke, phyllite, biotite gneiss, and minor conglomerate of
the Bill Arp thrust sheet (Higgins and others, 1988). Similar rocks comprise prominent northeast-
trending belts immediately north of the Brevard Fault zone, on either side of the Towaliga Fault,
and discontinuously along the trend of the Towaliga Fault to the South Carolina border in Hart
                                          IV-4    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
fro
 I
 Q.
 O
 3
 o
 o
 e

 cr.
 o


-------
                                                              I   I   I   I -t—I
Figure 3. Average annual precipitation in Georgia (redrawn from Perkins and Shaffer, 1977).

-------
Figure 4. Generalized geologic map of Georgia (after Georgia Dermagat
of Natural Resources,

-------
                             EXPLANATION
              GENERALIZED GEOLOGIC MAP OF GEORGIA
                            COASTAL PLAIN
QUATERNARY
Well sorted marine and eolian sands, lagoonal and marsh clay and silt, and fluvial terrace
sand and gravel.

PLIOCENE- MIOCENE-OLIGOCENE

Pliocene sand and gravel; Miocene sand, pebbly sand, clayey sand, sandy clay, and clay,
including the Hawthorne, Miccosukee, and Citronelle Formations, and Altamaha
Grit; Oligocene limestone and marl, including the Suwannee Limestone.

EOCENE AND PALEOCENE

Eocene quartz sand, clay, and calcareous sand, including the Irwinton Sand, Twiggs
Clay, Clinchfield Sand, and McBean Formation; Eocene limestone, marl, and
calcareous clay, including the Ocala and Sandersville Limestones, Cooper Marl, and
Lisbon Formation; Eocene quartz sand, glauconitic sand, and clay, including the
Talhatta and Hatchetigbee Formations; Paleocene quartz sand, glauconitic sand,
carbonaceous clay, and clay, including the Congaree, Huber, Lang Syne, Tuscahoma,
and Nanafalia Formations; Paleocene limestone and quartz sand of the Clayton
Formation,

CRETACEOUS

Quartz sand, glauconitic sand, sandy clay, carbonaceous clay, and clay including the
Providence Sand, Ripley Formation, Cusetta Sand, Blufftown and Eutaw
Formations; arkosic sand and conglomerate, locally carbonaceous, with red clay of the
Tuscaloosa Formation.

            VALLEY AND RIDGE AND APPALACHIAN PLATEAU

PENNSYLVANIAN-MISSISSIPPIAN-DEVONIAN

Pennsylvanian sandstone, conglomerate, and shale with coal seams of the Pottsville
Formation; Mississippian shale, limestone, sandstone, and chert, including the
Pennington Formation, Floyd Shale, Bangor, Monteagle, and Tuscumbia
Limestones, Fort Payne Chert, and Maury Formation; Devonian Chattanooga Shale,
Armuchee Chert, and Frog Mountain Sandstone.

SBLURIAN-ORDOVICIAN-CAMBRIAN

Silurian ferruginous sandstone and shale of the Red Mountain Formation;Ordovician
and Cambrian limestone, dolomite, shale, sandstone, and chert, including the
Chickamauga Group, Knox Group, Conasauga Group, Rome Formation, and Shady
Dolomite; Cambrian quartzite and shale of the Chilhowee Group,

-------
:««
                         PIEDMONT AND BLUE RIDGE
PERMIAN to PROTEROZOIC
Granite and granitic gneiss, includes the Palmetto, Ben Hill, Stone Mountain, Panola,
Elberton, and Appling granites in the Georgiabama Thrast Stack and Grenville
Basement; and migmatMc biotite and.amphibolite gneiss of the Little River Thrust Stack.
Quartzite and quartzite with lesser amounts of mica schist, phyilite, and/or amphibolite.
Phyllite, graphitic phyilite, and mica schist with lesser amounts of quartzite.
Mica schist and graphitic schist with lesser amounts of gneiss and amphibolite.
Hornblende gneiss, amphibolite,  and locally metadiabase and metagabbro.
Metadacite and metavolcanics interbedded with phyilite and meta-argillite.
Mica schist, metagraywacke, slate, quartzite, conglomerate, amphibolite, biotite gneiss,
hornblende gneiss,  granite gneiss, biotite gneiss, mica schist, and amphibolite in the
Georgiabama Thrust Stack; biotite granite gneiss, feldspathic biotite gneiss, and
amphibolite-hornblende gneiss in the Little River Thrust Stack.

-------
 Appalaclan
  Plateau
               Rome-Kingston
                Thrust Stack
Qeorgiabama
Thrust  Stack
         Figure 5. Tectonic/geologic area map of Georgia (after Higgins and others, 1988).

-------
County. Nearly 40 percent of the Georgiabama Thrust Stack in the Piedmont Province is underlain
by •garnet-rich mica schist, hornblende-plagioclase amphibolites, and biotite gneiss termed the
Zebulon Sheet by Higgins and others (1988). In addition, a complex variety of meta-igneous,
metavolcanic, and metasedimentary rocks are incorporated into a series of narrow thrust sheets
throughout the Piedmont portion of the Georgiabama Thrust Stack. Some of the more spatially
important units are: muscovite-plagioclase gneiss and sillimanite-rich plagioclase schist underlying
a large part of Elbert and Oglethorpe Counties; a mixed assemblage of ampMbolite, biotite schist,
metatuffs, and quartzite occurring discontinuously from Dekalb to Coweta County in the north and
Butts to Pike County in the south; a narrow belt of quartzite, schist, and minor ampMbolite that is
within and immediaterynorth of the Brevard Fault zone; and narrow belts of metabasalt that are
complexly folded in the area between the Brevard Fault zone and the Allatoona Fault The
Georgiabama Thrust Stack is intruded by numerous granites and granitic gneisses  that are
complexly folded and faulted.  Most of these are Silurian-Devonian or Carboniferous in age.

The Little River Thrust Stack
       The area of Piedmont Province south of the Auchumpkee Fault consists of severely
sheared, metamorphosed Precambrian to Cambrian volcaniclastic and basinal sedimentary rocks of
the Little River Thrust Stack. These rocks comprise thrust sheets that form northeastward-trending
belts. The Little River Thrust Stack is dominated by slightly metamorphosed calc-alkaline volcanic
and volcaniclastic rocks of the Little River AUochthon (Higgins and others, 1988)  east of Putnam
County and along a narrow belt on the southern margin that is overlapped by Coastal Plain
deposits. Most of the Little River Thrust Stack is underlain by feldspathic and micaceous schist
with amphibole-bearing metagraywacke, schistose pebbly mudstone, and tuffaeeous metachert
Numerous small bodies of metadiabase, metagabbro, and amphibolite are common in a broad belt
just south of the Auchumpkee Fault  These rocks also underlie much of northern Burke County
and Richmond and Jefferson Counties.  Granites and granitic gneiss that are mostly Silurian-
Devonian or Carboniferous in age intrude the Little River Thrust Stack, particularly in the eastern
part of the belt

The Rome-Kingston Thrust Stack
       The Valley and Ridge Province is underlain by rocks of the Rome-Kingston Thrust Stack,
which is bounded to the south by the Emerson Fault and to the east by the Carter's Dam fault
Paleozoic sedimentary rocks of Cambrian through Pennsylvanian age form tightly folded ridges
and valleys separated by northeast-trending thrusts. The majority of the area is underlain by
Cambrian through Ordovician limestone, dolomite, and shale with minor sandstone. Narrow
outcrop belts of Silurian and Devonian sandstones and shales lie between the Cambrian through
Ordovician rock units. Pennsylvanian to Mississippian sandstone, shale, conglomerate and
limestone underlie two significant areas: the western edge of the area along the Dade-Walker
county line and the northwestern corner of Chattooga County.
       The oldest Cambrian rocks are quartzite and shale of the Chilhowee Group, which are
restricted to a few small areas in the eastern part of the province. The middle to upper Cambrian
rocks have progressively more carbonate units beginning with the Shady Dolomite; the Rome
Formation, consisting of sandstone, shale, mudstone, and siltstone interbedded with limestone and
dolomite; and the Conasauga Group, consisting of alternating beds of limestone and shale with
sandstone and dolomite. The Conasauga Group outcrops are the most extensive of the middle to
upper Cambrian units, underlying one-third of the area between the Rome and Carter's Dam faults.
                                          IV-11    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
The Conasauga thins to the west, however, and the westernmost belt of Rome Formation is
directly overlain by the upper Cambrian-Qrdovician Knox Group.
       The upper Cambrian and Qrdovician-age rocks of the Rome-Kingston Thrust Stack are
dominated by limestone and dolomite. The Knox Group, consisting of dolomite, limestone, and
chert, is the most extensive unit, underlying nearly half of the area between the Rome and Great
Smoky Faults and forming several prominent belts in the western part of the province. The Knox
Group is unconf ormably overlain by limestone of the middle to upper Qrdovician Chickamauga
Group, which forms prominent outcrop belts in the western part of the area. The Ordovieian
Athens Shale and Rockmart Slate comprise several narrow, mostly fault-bounded belts
immediately east of the~Carter's Dam Fault near the Tennessee border and north of the Emerson
Fault
       The Silurian and Devonian-age rocks of the Rome-Kingston Thrust Stack are dominated by
the Silurian Red Mountain Formation, consisting of ferruginous sandstone and shale, and narrow
belts of the Devonian Chattanooga Shale.  These units are separated by the Devonian Frog
Mountain Sandstone in the east and the Armuchee Chert in the west
       Mississrppian-age shale, limestone, sandstone, and chert underlie the northeastern corner
of Chattooga County and comprise narrow belts in the western part of the area. The succession
consists of shales of the Maury Formation; Fort Payne Chert, with the Lavender Shale member to
the east; the Floyd Shale, with sandstone and limestone members that are equivalent to the
Tuscumbia and Monteagle Limestones to the west; the Bangor Limestone; and shale and sandstone
of the Pennington Formation.
       Pennsylvanian-age rocks are dominated by sandstone, conglomerate, and shale with minor
coal beds. These underlie a few small areas capping the Mississippian rocks in northeastern
Chattooga County and comprise a broad belt in the west consisting of the Pennington and
Pottsville Formations.

Appalachian Plateau
       The Appalachian Plateau Province is underlain by gently dipping sandstone, conglomerate,
shale, limestone, and coal of Mississippian and Pennsylvanian age. Mississippian rocks are the
same as those described for the western part of the Rome-Kingston Thrust Stack, and are restricted
to a narrow belt along the edge of that province and the lowest parts of the stream drainages in the
northwestern corner of the State. Pennsylvanian fluvial sandstone and conglomerate with shale
and coal interbeds of the Pottsville Formation underlie most of the province.

Coastal Plain
       Nearly 60 percent of Georgia is underlain, by relatively unconsolidated sediments of the
Coastal Plain Province. These deposits include sand, silt, clay, marl, limestone, and conglomerate
that form a sedimentary wedge which thickens southeastward.  The intersection of these gently-
dipping beds with the land surface produce northeast-trending  belts that are progressively younger
to the southeast  Coastal Plain deposits adjacent to the Piedmont Province are incised by dendritic
drainages that expose older sediments in the channels. Cretaceous sediments form a broad belt in
the northwestern corner of the province that directly overlie weathered rocks of the Piedmont, but
they are mostly restricted to the bottoms of drainages in the northeast A belt of early Tertiary
sediments also thins to the northeast and directly overlies the Piedmont rocks in places.  Late
Tertiary sediments comprise a very broad belt that underlies about half of the province.  Quaternary
sediments form a broad belt along the Georgia coast and also fill the major river valleys. •
                                          IV-12    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
       The oldest sediments exposed in the northern Coastal Plain of Georgia belong to the
Cretaceous Tusealoosa Formation, which consists of fluvial sand and conglomerate with local
lignite concentrations, interbedded with mottled red clay. This is overlain by marine sand and clay
of the Eutaw Formation. The older northwestern portion of the Eutaw consists of coarse to fine
quartz sand, whereas the younger portion to the southeast consists of micaceous, fossiliferous,
fine to medium quartz sand, with interbeds of micaceous sand, sandy clay, and carbonaceous clay.
The succeeding Blufftown Formation is cross-bedded marine quartz sand at the base, grading
upward to a glauconitic, fine-grained, calcareous sand, fossiliferous fine-grained sand interbedded
with micaceous clay, and marl and carbonaceous clay and silt The Cusseta Sand is a cross-
bedded, medium-to coarse-grained, quartz sand with thin beds of carbonaceous clay that increase
in frequency toward the top. The Ripley Formation unconformably overlies the Cusseta,
commonly having a basal phosphatic lag gravel. Most of the Ripley is a massive, medium-
grained, micaceous and glauconitic quartz sand that is finer grained and more calcareous toward the
top of the unit, with calcite and siderite concretions common. The Ripley coarsens to the north
and is composed mostly of quartz sand near the Ocmulgee River. The youngest Cretaceous unit is
the Providence Sand, consisting mostly of cross-bedded, fine- to coarse-grained, marine quartz
sand with locally abundant clay clasts, mica, and heavy minerals.
       Paleocene sediments are restricted to a narrow belt southwest of the Ocmulgee River, and
they are not mapped separately to the north. The Clayton Formation consists of fossiliferous
limestone and medium- to coarse-grained quartz sand. Coarse quartz sand, red clay, and
concretions of limordte-goethite and chert characterize the residuum on the Clayton. The Nanafalia
Formation consists of fluvial quartz sand with clay intraclasts interbedded with sandy clay and
carbonaceous clay that is locally bauxitic. The Tuscahoma Formation is a marine clay with laminae
of very fine" quartz sand and silt. The base of the Tuscahoma is an irregular, undulating surface
with pebble lags of clay clasts, phosphatic material, carbonaceous debris, and glauconitic sand.
The Tuscahoma pinches out east of the Flint River. The northern occurrences of Paleocene and
oldest Eocene deposits are equivalent to the Lang Syne, Huber, and Congaree Formations in South
Carolina. The Lang Syne is glauconitic sand and clayey sand at the base with increasing black clay
beds toward the top; .the Huber is medium- to coarse-grained quartz sand with pebbles at the base,
grading upward to mostly pure kaolinitic clay then orange quartz sand with clay clasts at the top;
the Congaree is mostly medium- to coarse-grained quartz sand with green clay layers near the base
and clay clasts and pebbles near the top.
       Eocene-age sediments comprise a broad outcrop band in the south that narrows to the
north, where exposure of units is restricted to drainages. The oldest  Eocene unit is the
Hatchetigbee Formation, which is fine-grained, glauconitic quartz sand interbedded with clay, silt,
and fine sand at the base, and cross-bedded with silicified fossils near the top. The Qairborne
Group consists of the Talhatta Formation, comprising cross-bedded quartz sand with pebbles and
clay clasts near the base, and glauconitic, fossiliferous sand, limestone, and calcareous clay of the
Lisbon Formation.  Near the South Carolina state line, these rocks are equivalent to the Congaree
Formation and the McBean.Formation, which is acalcareous sandy clay and clayey sand with
quartz sand interbeds. The calcareous Clinchfield Sand directly overlies Paleocene beds in the area
between the Flint and Ocmulgee Rivers. In the southern part of the province, the Clairborne
Group and the Clinchfield Sand are overlain by the fossiliferous Ocala Limestone, which forms a
sandy clay residuum with boulders and cobbles of chert and limestone. The Ocala comprises a .
broad belt together with residuum from overlying Oligocene calcareous units. North of the
Ocmulgee River, Cretaceous and Paleocene sediments are overlain by the Twiggs Clay, which is
                                          IV-13    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
mostly montmorilloiiitic clay with calcareous sand interbeds, but has calcareous sand at the base
that is equivalent to the dinchfield Sand. The Twiggs Clay is overlain by the Irwinton Sand, a
medium- to coarse-grained quartz sand with minor clay. The Irwinton is equivalent to the Cooper
Marl and Sandersville Limestone, which crop out in stream drainages southeast of the outcrop belt.
       Oligocene sediments are predominantly limestone and marl, which are highly weathered
into residual sandy clay soils. The Suwanee Limestone comprises a narrow band that becomes
broader around the Ocmulgee River, then pinches out north of the Oconee River.
       Miocene sediments are dominated by fine- to coarse-grained quartz sand and pebbly sand,
clay, and sandy clay that comprise a broad belt of sediment underlying about one-third of the
Coastal Plain. 'In the area south of Worth, Tift, and Berrien Counties, the poorly sorted,
phosphatic, clayey, coarse sand of the Hawthorn Formation is restricted to river drainages and is
overlain by sand and clay of the Miccosukee Formation. North of this area, the Hawthorne
Formation, CitroneUe Formation, and Altamaha Grit are not differentiated.
       Pliocene-Pleistocene sand and gravel comprise a broad belt from the Florida state line in
Echols County northeast to central Jeff Davis and Appling Counties and western Wayne County.
Smaller areas underlain by these sediments occur northward along the same trend to the South
Carolina state line. The Pliocene Charlton Formation and Duplin Marl comprise a narrow belt
along the Savannah River in northeastern Effingham County.
       Quaternary deposits near the Atlantic coast consist of broad lowland belts underlain by
marsh and lagoonal clay, and narrow ridges composed of well-sorted marine and eolian sand. The
belts are progressively younger to the southeast and the lagoonal clay belts are narrower at the
present coastline. Quaternary fluvial sand and gravel form terraces along the major rivers.

SOILS

       A generalized soil map for Georgia is shown in figure 6. The following discussion is
condensed from  U.S. Soil Conservation Service (1987) and Perkins and Shaffer (1977). The
terminology used on the map and in the following discussion is from these references. It is
recommended that the reader consult these, Soil Conservation Service county soil surveys, and
other publications for more detailed information.
       Soils of the Appalachian Plateau in Georgia are dominantly Ultisols, mature, deeply
weathered, light-colored sandy and loamy acidic soils with clayey B horizons. Areas of
Inceptisols are located in the northwesternmost part of the Appalachian Plateau. Inceptisols are
poorly developed mineral soils with horizons of alteration or accumulation of metal oxides such as
iron, aluminum, or manganese, but without horizons of clay accumulation.  Soils of the Valley and
Ridge, Blue Ridge, and Piedmont consist almost entirely of Ultisols.  Alfisols, soils with light-
colored, leached  surface horizons and  thick, clayey B horizons, occur locally in the Piedmont,
primarily along gentle slopes adjacent to alluvial valleys.  Soils underlying the oldest sediments of
the Coastal Plain include Ultisols, Alfisols, and Entisols, the latter of which are immature soils that
exhibit little or no evidence of soil development. Soils underlying the youngest sediments of the
Coastal Plain include Ultisols, Inceptisols, Spodosols, and Histosols. Inceptisols have formed on
beaches and tidal flats along the coastline in the southeastern part of the State.  Histosols, organic-
rich soils common to swamps and marshes, and Spodosols, soils containing a sandy subsurface
horizon cemented by iron, aluminum, and/or organic matter, cover the Okefenokee  Basin in the
southern part of the Coastal Plain.
                                          IV-14    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
                                         kilometers
          Appalachian Plateau: Soils developed from sandstone,
          shale, and limestone on mountain plateaus with steep sided
          slopes. Soils are moderately well to well drained, becoming
          poorly drained in bottom lands. Permeability is generally
          moderate with local areas of low and high permeability.
          Blue Ridge:  Deep to shallow soils with a sandy loam
          surface and sandy clay loam to clay subsoil, formed from
          material weathered from granite, gneiss, and schist, and
          locally high in ferromagnesian minerals. Soils on ridges
          and slopes tend to be well drained, becoming more poorly
          drained in floodplains and low-lying areas. Permeability is
          generally moderate.

          Fall Line Hills: Steeply sloping to  nearly level well
          drained soils with a sandy surface layer underlain by a
          friable to firm loamy subsoil. Soils become more poorly
          drained on floodplains, stream terraces, and low-lying
          uplands. Permeability ts moderite in upland soils.-becoming
          low to moderate in low-lying areas such as floodplains and
          stream terraces.
          Southern Coastal Plain: Generally gently sloping to nearly
          level well drained sandy loam to sandy soils underlain by
          sandy clay loam to clayey subsoils.  Upland soils lend to
          be well to very well drained with low to moderate permeability,
          becoming more poorly drained away from slopes.  Soils on
          floodplains are poorly drained with moderate permeability.
 Valley and Ridge: Soils derived mainly from sandstone
 and shale on ridges and slopes and from limestone in more
 gently sloping valleys. Generally soils are moderately to
well drained on ridges and steeper slopes, becoming more
poorly drained in bottomlands and on gentle slopes.
 Permeability is moderate on gentle slopes, becoming
moderately high on steeper slopes.
                                              •*
 Piedmont Generally well drained, thin red soil on gentle
 to steep hills and slopes with a loamy surface layer and a
 friable to firm loamy to clayey subsoil and moderate
 permeability. Soils in nearly level areas tend to have lower
 permeability and become more poorly drained.  Soils in
 stream terraces and low-lying uplands have higher
 permeability and are moderately to poorly drained.

 Black Lands: Gentry sloping poorly to moderately drained
 sous on uplands, having a loamy surface layer and a clayey
 subsoil underlain in places by marl clay or chalk.
 Permeability is generally low.
 Atlantic Coast Flatwoods:  Level to nearly level soils that
are mostly sandy at the surface or throughout and moderately
permeable and poorly drained. Soils sandy only at the surface
are underlain by a clayey to loamy subsoil, and are high in
organic material on floodplains.  Clayey soils occur in tidal
marshes. Locally low and high permeability occurrences.
Figure 6. Generalized soil map of Georgia (modified from Hodler and Schretter, 1986, and
Perkins and Shaffer,  1977).

-------
       Deep to shallow soils with a sandy loam surface and sandy clay loam to clay subsoil,
formed from material weathered from granite, gneiss, and schist, and locally high in
ferromagnesian minerals, are characteristic of the Blue Ridge. Soils on ridges and slopes tend to
be well drained, becoming more poorly drained in floodplains and low-lying areas.  Permeability is
generally slow to moderate.
    •   Soils of the Piedmont are derived from granite,  gneiss, and schist These soils are
generally well drained, thin red soils on gentle to steep hills and slopes with a loamy surface layer
and a Triable to firm, loam to clayey loam subsoil with slow to moderate permeability. Soils in
level areas tend to have lower permeability and are more poorly drained. Soils on stream terraces
and low-lying uplands Rave higher permeability and are moderately to poorly drained. Soil
permeability data collected as part of solid waste landfill assessments performed by the State of
Georgia indicate that some published permeability measurements for the Piedmont are
overestimates, and that Piedmont soil permeability is generally low (W.H. McLemore, written
communication, 1992).
       Soils in the Valley and  Ridge are derived from sandstone and shale on ridges and slopes
and from limestone in valleys.  Generally, soils are moderately to well drained on ridges and
steeper slopes, becoming more poorly drained in bottomlands and on gentle slopes.  Permeability
is slow in clayey bottomlands, slow to moderate on gentle slopes (<10 percent), becoming
moderately high on steeper slopes (10-60 percent). Soils developed on limestones are a solution
residuum of reddish-orange silty to sandy clay.  Soils derived from sandstones are clayey sand to
sandy clay with abundant iron  oxide and fragments of sandstone.  Chert and shale fragments are
found in the soil in places.  Areas of shale have clay and silty clay decomposition residuum
containing shale chips and hematitic zones.
       Soils of the Appalachian Plateau are derived from sandstone, shale, and limestone on
mountain plateaus with steep-sided slopes. These soils  are moderately well to well drained,
becoming poorly drained in bottomlands. Permeability  is generally moderate, with local areas of
low and high permeability. Soils are coarse to fine sand, clayey sand, and sandy clay and may
include chips of sandstone and shale. Where clayey, the soils have a high shrink-swell potential
and slow permeability when moist
       Soils of the Coastal Plain have characteristics that are attributable to the underlying
sediments.  In the Fall Line Hills (Sand Hills), soils are steeply sloping to nearly level, well-
drained sand and sandy loam with a sandy surface layer that is underlain by a friable to firm, loamy
subsoil. Soils are more poorly drained on floodplains,  stream terraces, and low-lying uplands.
Permeability is moderate in upland soils and low to moderate in low-lying areas such as
floodplains and stream terraces. Soils of the Upper Coastal Plain to the north are mostly saprolitic
and have low permeability. In the Black Lands, soils are gently sloping, poorly to moderately
drained, clayey loam and loamy clay on uplands, having a loamy surface layer and a clayey subsoil
underlain in places by marl clay or chalk. Permeability is generally low. In the southern Coastal
Plain, the soils are generally gently sloping to nearly level, well drained, sandy loams underlain by
sandy clay loam to clay subsoils. Upland soils tend to be well to very well drained, with low to
moderate permeability, becoming more poorly drained  away from slopes. Soils on floodplains are
poorly drained and have moderate permeability.  The Atlantic Coast Flatwoods have poorly
drained, level to nearly level soils that are mostly sand throughout the profile and are moderately
permeable. Some of the soils are sandy only  at the surface and are underlain by a clayey to loamy
subsoil, and are high in organic material on floodplains. Clayey soils with low permeability occur
in tidal marshes.
                                          IV-16    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
RADIOACTIVITY

       An aeroradiometric map of Georgia (fig. 7) was compiled from spectral gamma-ray data
acquired during the U.S. Department of Energy's National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE)
program (Duval and others, 1989). For the purposes of this report, low equivalent uranium (eU)
is defined as less man 13 parts per million (ppm), moderate equivalent uranium is defined as
1.5-2.5 ppm, and high equivalent uranium is defined as greater than 2.5 ppm.
       Low eU coincides with areas underlain by the youngest barrier island sequences in the
Quaternary of the Coastal Plain, the Okefenokee Swamp, and Pliocene-Pleistocene gravel and
sand. Low to moderatef radioactivity coincides with areas underlain by the Oligocene Suwanee
Limestone (or more likely, the swampy clays formed on it), some of the Eocene and Cretaceous
sediments, most of the mafic rock bodies and associated biotite gneiss in the Georgiabama Thrust
Stack, the mafic volcanic rocks in the Little River Thrust Stack, and most of the Mississippian and
Pennsylvanian rocks of the Rome-Kingston Thrust Stack and the Appalachian Plateau. Moderate
eU correlates with most of the Tertiary and middle Cretaceous sediments, the migmatitic biotite and
amphibolite gneiss that intrudes the eastern part of the Little River Thrust Stack, mica schist and
gneiss north of the Towaliga Fault, biotite gneiss, metagraywacke, and phyllite of the northern
Georgiabama Thrust Stack, and most of the carbonate rocks and shales of the Rome-Kingston
Thrust Stack.
       Moderate to locally high eU coincides with the areas underlain by Quaternary shorelines of
the barrier ridge sequence (this correlates with the titanium sand deposits of the northern Florida
coast). The Pleistocene deposits of the Altamaha River also coincide with mostly moderate to
locally high radioactivity, possibly due to mineral concentrates originating in the Piedmont. Areas
underlain by the phosphatic Hawthorne Formation and its equivalents to the north are coincident
with locally high radioactivity and may account for the areas of 2.5-3.5 ppm eU in Wilcox, Telfair,
and Dodge Counties, and in Bleckley,  Laurens, and Wilkinson Counties. Local zones of high
radioactivity are also coincident with some of the Cretaceous to Eocene sediments. High eU forms
a broad belt from northeast to southwest across the north-central part of the State that is coincident
with granitic gneisses, uraniferous granites, biotite gneisses, and shear zones within the
Georgiabama Thrust Stack, particularly south of the Brevard Zone. High eU is also coincident
with areas underlain by felsic volcanics in the Little River Thrust Stack, graphitic phyllite in the
Georgiabama Thrust Stack, and shales in the Rome-Kingston Thrust Stack.
       The Geochemical Atlas of Georgia (Koch, 1988) presents the NURE stream sediment data
for the State. These data are chemical analyses, including uranium, for stream sediments
throughout the northern two-thirds of the State.  A map of uranium concentration in stream
sediments, Plate 35 from the report, is  shown in figure 8.  Many of the major uranium anomalies
seen in figure 8 are related to the mineral monazite. Uranium occurrences in Georgia are well
documented in the literature.  Furcron  (1955), Garvey (1975), and Grauch  and Zarinski (1976)
provide tables and some analyses of uranium and radioactivity occurrences in Georgia. Grauch
and Zarinski (1976) note mineral occurrences of uranium predominantly in pegmatite, granite, and
gneiss in the Piedmont and Blue Ridge. The NURE Reports for the Rome, Greenville, Atlanta,
Athens, Phenix  City, Macon, and Savannah Quadrangles contain extensive reference lists of
uranium occurrences and in some reports, chemical analyses. Lee (1980) presents data from
extensive chemical analyses of rocks in the Athens Quadrangle. He indicates that contacts between
the Piedmont rocks and Cretaceous to Eocene sediments commonly contain uranium concentrations
around 4 ppm UsQg. Carbonaceous debris in the Coastal Plain sediments locally have uranium
                                          IV-17    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
Figure 7. Aerial radiometric map of Georgia (after Duval and others, 1989). Contour lines at 1.5
   and 2.5 ppm equivalent uranium (eU). Pixels shaded at 0.5 pprn elJ increments.

-------
                                                                   U (Uranium)
                 TOTAL NUMBED OF SAMPLES 585
            Symool
   PPM
4256 - 124
 121 - 61
  6.1 - 36
 <3.6
Percent o' aasa
     250
     250
     250
     250
                                                                     0  10
                                                                            25
                                                                                   50 MILES
Figure 8. Uranium in stream sediments coEected under the National Uranium Resources
Evalua'tion (NURE) program (from Koch, 1988),

-------
concentrations of 8-15 ppm with upper values of 45-50 ppm. Analyses of granites in the Blue
Ridge and Piedmont by Lee (1980) yielded average values of 3-10 ppm UsOg—the highest
concentration was 40 ppm in the large granite body in the eastern Little River Thrust Stack.
Granitic gneiss in the Georgiabama Thrust Stack has uranium concentrations between 3-8 ppm,
except in the "monazite belt" in Barrow and Gwinnet Counties, which has uranium concentrations
of 15-29 ppm.  Biotite gneiss and mica schist with gneiss are highly variable, containing 1-13 ppm
uranium. Migmatitic biotite and amphibolite gneiss in the southeastern Little River Thrust Stack
contain 1-8 ppm uranium. Mafic volcanic rocks in the Little River Thrust Stack and mafic rock
bodies in the Georgiabama Thrust Stack average 1-2 ppm (no values less than 1 ppm were
reported). The highestconcentrations reported by Lee (1980) are 490 and 620 ppm UsOg from a
granitic gneiss layer within a mafic body. Lee (1980) suggests that metasedimentary and
rnetavoleanic rocks that are in contact with granites have a high potential for uranium mineralization
and range from 1 to 13 ppm UsOg, with an average of 4.5 ppm. McConnell and Costello (1980)
analyzed graphitic phylMtes in the Athens Quadrangle and found the average uranium concentration
to be 4.7 ppm as measured by a gamma-ray spectrometer. Graphitic phyllite in the Bill Arp Sheet
near Carroll County had uranium concentrations as high as 10.6 and 12.0 ppm, and a single
measurement of 75 ppm was recorded from a graphitic phyllite northwest of New Georgia.
McConnell and Costello's (1980) analyses of the Palmetto Granite in Fulton, Coweta, and Fayette
Counties yielded 2.4-7.6 ppm of uranium. The Lithonia granitic gneiss has 2.8-5.9 ppm uranium.
McConnell and Costello (1980) also measured other granites and granitic gneiss in the Piedmont
and found uranium concentrations of 2.5-8.0 ppm. Their analyses of aplite dikes in the Austell
Gneiss in western Douglas County yielded high values of 117-240 ppm uranium. Glover (1959)
analyzed the Chattanooga Shale in Georgia and adjacent states and found that it has an average
concentratibn of 50 ppm U. The highest uranium concentrations in the Chattanooga (80-120 ppm
in the Georgia  samples) are associated with chert and phosphate nodules. Friddell (1980)
conducted a detailed study of the Holocene Penholoway and Talbot shorelines in areas coincident
with six aeroradiometric highs  (Glynn and Mclntosh Counties). He reported uranium
concentrations (radium equivalent uranium) varying from 0.3 to 19.5 ppm, with an average of
4.5 ppm.

INDOORRADON

      Indoor radon data from 1534  homes sampled in the State/EPA Residential Radon Survey
conducted in Georgia during the winter of 1989 are shown in figure 9 and Table 1. A map of
counties is included for reference (fig, 10). Data are shown in figure 9 only for those counties
with 5 or more data values.  The average for the State was 1.7 pCi/L and the 6.5 percent of the
homes tested had indoor radon levels exceeding 4 pCi/L.  Indoor radon averages for the counties in
the Valley and  Ridge, Blue Ridge, and Piedmont are generally in the low (<2 pCi/L) to moderate,
(2-4 pCi/L) range. Indoor radon averages for counties in the Coastal Plain are generally low. Data
are sparse for the southwestern Coastal Plain.
      Radon from domestic well water may also contribute to  radon in indoor air in certain parts
of Georgia. There is considerable debate over the amount of indoor radon that is liberated to
indoor air from water use. Several studies indicate that degassing of radon from water can cause
spikes in indoor air concentrations, especially during peak water-use periods (Hess and others,
1986; Nazaroff and Nero, 1988). The amount of radon that is contributed to indoor air from water
varies substantially and is related to the volume of air in the house and the volume of water used
                                         IV-20    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
                                                      Bsmt. & 1st Floor Rn
                                                          %>4pCi/L
                                                74
20 S
si
li
ll
OtolO
11 to 20
21 to 30
31 to 40
41 to 60
                                                 60
Missing Data
or < 5 measurements
                                                        100 Miles
                                                            Bsmt. & 1st Floor.Rn
                                                        Average Concentration (pCi/L)
                                                  73  -Mv^
   0.0 to 1,9
   2.0 to 4.0
   4.1 to 7.1
   Missing Data
   or < 5 measurements
Figure 9. Screening indoor radon data from the EPA/State Residential Radon Survey of Georgia,
1988-89, for counties with 5 or more measurements.  Data are from 2-7 day charcoal canister
tests.  Histograms in map legends show the number of counties in each category.  The number of
samples in each county (See Table 1) may not be sufficient to statistically characterize the radon
levels of the counties, but they do suggest general trends. Unequal category intervals were
chosen to provide reference to decision and action levels.

-------
TABLE 1.  Screening indoor radon data from the EPA/State Residential Radon Survey of
Georgia conducted during 1988-89. Data represent 2-7 day charcoal canister measurements
from the lowest level of each home tested.
COUNTY .
APPLING
ATKINSON
BACON
BALDWIN
BANKS
BARROW
BARTOW
BEN HILL
BERRffiN
BIBB
BLECKLEY
BRANTLEY
BROOKS
BRYAN
BULLOCH
BURKE
BUTTS
CALHOUN
CAMDEN
CANDLER
CARROLL
CATOOSA
CHARLTON
CHATHAM
CHATTOOGA
CHEROKEE
CLARKE
CLAY
CLAYTON
CLINCH
COBB
COFFEE
COLQUITT
COLUMBIA
COOK
COWETA
CRAWFORD
CRISP
DADE
DAWSON
DEKALB
NO. OF
MEAS.
9
5
- 6
5
6
8
9
4
4
23
7
4
2
9
20
5
6
1
15
2
25
5
5
20
5
10
8
1
30
4
83
22
17
24
1
13
3
8
7
2
76
MEAN
0.6
1.0
1.3
1.0
1.7
1.9
1.6
1.0
0.7
1.2
1.5
0.6
0.9
0.8
1.0
0.9
2.0
1.7
0.3
0.8
1.4
2.4
0.4
•0.9
1.0
1.5
2.7
0.4
1.8
0.3
1.8
0.8
0.8
1.4
1.4
1.2
.1.4
0.6
1.5
1.5
2.6
GEOM.
MEAN
0.5
0.5
0.8
1.0
1.5
1.8
1.4
0.7
0.6
0.9
1.3
0.6
0.7
0.6
0.8
0.9
1.7
1.7
0.2
0.7
1.0
1.9
0.3
0.7
0.7
1.3
2.3
0.4
1.4
0.2
1.3
0.7
0.7
•1.0
1.4
0.9
1.2-
0,4
1.1
1.3
1.8
MEDIAN
0.7
0.5
1.1
0.9
1.6
1.9
1.5
0.9
0.8
1.1
1.6
0.6
0.9
1.0
0.8
0.9
1.9
1.7
0.2
0.8
1.0
1.3
0.4
0.7
1.1
1.2
2.9
0.4
1.4
0.2
1.5
0.7
0.8
1.0
1.4
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.9
1.5
-.1.8
STD.
DEV.
0.4
1.4
1.1
0.3
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.4
0.9
0.5
0.3
0.6
0.5
0.7
0.4
1.2
0.0
0.3
0.1
1.2
2.4
0.4
0.7
0.6
1.0
1.4
0.0
1.4
0.3
1.4
0.4
0.5
1.2
0.0
1.2
1.0
0.4
1.2
1.0
2.7
MAXIMUM
1.3
3.5
3.2
1.4
2.7
2.9
2.9
1,8
1.1
4.2
2.1
0.9
1.3
1.3
2.5
1.5
4.0
1.7
0.9
0.8
5.1
6.7
1.0
3.4
1.8
3.6
5.1
0.4
5.6
0.7
6.7
2.1
1.6
6.1
1.4
4.9
2.6
1.1
3.8
2.2
15.4
%>4pCi/L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
' 0
0
4
20
0
0
0
0
13
0
13
0
8
0
0
4
0
8
0
0
0
0
11
%>20pCi/L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
- 0
0

-------
TABLE 1 (continued).  Screening indoor radon data for Georgia.
COUNTY
DECATOR
DODGE
DOOLY
DOUGHERTY
DOUGLAS
EARLY
ECHOLS
EEHNGHAM
ELBERT
EMANUEL
EVANS
FANMN
FAYETTE .
FLOYD
FORSYTE
FRANKLIN
FULTON
GELMER
GLASCOCK
GLYNN
GORDON
GRADY
GREENE
GWINNETT
HABERSHAM
HALL
HANCOCK
HARALSON
HARRIS
HART
HEARD
HENRY
HOUSTON
IRWIN
JACKSON
JASPER
JEFF DA VIS
JEFFERSON
JENKINS
JOHNSON
JONES
LAMAR
LANDER
NO, OF
MEAS.
9
4
2
11
-.. 26
3
1
12
5
9
5
5
31
18
11
7
75
5
2
6
7
6
3
73
12
37
6
9
2
11
1
17
18
1
6
3
5
2
5
4
6
3
2
MEAN
0.8
0.6
1.7
2.1
2.9
2.0
0.6
0.5
2.5
0.5
0.6
7.1
2.0
•1.6
1.1
2.0
2.1
4.0
1.4
0.3
0.7
0.9
3.2
2.6
1.6
2.9
1.5
2.1
3.7
2.0
0.1
1.9
1.6
0.9
2.5
3.0
0.4
1.0
1.6
0.7
2.3
0.7
0.6
GEOM.
MEAN
0.6
0.4
1.6
1.7
2.3
1.1
0.6
0.4
1.6
0.5
0.5
4.8
1.5
1.2
0.9
1.7
1.6
3.2
1.1
0.2
0.5
0.8
2.1
1.9
1.2
2.0
0.9
1.6
2.8
1.6
0.1
1.6
1.3
0.9
1.9
2.3
0.3
1.0
1.3
0.5
2.1
0.6
0.5
MEDIAN
0.7
0.6
1.7
1.8
2.4
0.8
0;6
0.5
1.9
0.5
0.4
4.4
1.3
1.2
0.9
1.2
1.5
2.7
1.4
0.3
0.8
1.0
2.7
1.8
1.4
1.8
1.0
1.2
3.7
2.0
0.1
1.9
1.3
0.9
1.6
2.6
0.4
1.0
0.8
0.9
2.4
0.8
,0.6
STD.
DEV.
0.6
0.5
0.2
1.7
2.0
2.5
0.0
0.2
2.2
0.2
0.4
7.0
1.9
1.2
0.8
1.2
1.8
3.5
1.1
0.1
0.5
0.3
3.0
2.6
1.1
2.7
1.5
1.7
3.4
1.3
0.0
0.9
1.1
0.0
2.2
2.3
0.4
0.1
1.3
0.5
0.8
0.3
0.4
MAXIMUM
2.0
1.2
1.8
6.8
9.4
4.9
0.6
1.0
5.7
1.0
1.1
18.7
10.1
4.3
3.3
3.5
8.8
10.3
2.2
0.5
1.3
1.3
6.5
15.0
3.4
9.8
4.2
5.5
6.1
5.0
0.1
3.8
4.7
0.9
6.8
5.4
0.9
LI
3.6
1.1
3.5
0.9
0.8
%>4pCi/L
0
0
0
9
15
33
0
0
20
0
0
60
6
6
0
0
12
20
0
0
0
0
33
11
0
19
17
22
50
9
0
0
6
0
17
33
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
%>20pCi/L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

-------
TABLE 1 (continued).  Screening indoor radon data for Georgia.
COUNTY
LAURENS
LIBERTY
LINCOLN
LONG
LOWNDES
LUMPKIN
MACON
MADISON
MCDUFFE
MCINTOSH
MERIWETHER
MILLER
MITCHELL
MONROE
MONTGOMERY
MORGAN
MURRAY
MUSCOGEE
NEWTON
OCONEE
OGLETHORPE
PAULDING
PEACH
PICKENS
PIERCE
PIKE
POLK
PULASKI
PUTNAM
RABUN
RANDOLPH
RICHMOND
ROCKDALE
SCHLEY
SCREVEN
SEMINOLE
SPALDING
STEPHENS
STEWART
SUMTER
TALBOT
TALIAFERRO
TATTNALL
NO. OF
MEAS.
• 13
12
g
3
- 10
1
1
g
lg
2
9
2
8
3
3
6
9
22
8
1
4
4
5
4
13
6
8
3
11
6
2
26
24
2
5
1
19
12
1
12
3
3
7
MEAN
1.3
0.6
1.1
1.1
0.9
1.8
0.8
3.5
1.1
0.8
1.3
2.2
0.7
0.7
0.8
1.4
1.1
1.1
1.3
1.9
2.9
1.0
1.6
2.1
1.5
1.7
1.2
1.9
1.4
1.5
1.3
1.0
2.1
0.9
1.5
1.1
2.3
2.1
1.6
1.7
1.4
1.0
0.8
GEOM.
MEAN
1.1
0.5
0.8
1.1
0.7
1.8
0.8
1.8
0.8
0.7
1.1
2.1
0.5
0.6
O.g
1.1
0.9
0.9
1.1
1.9
2.6
0.6
1.3
1.5
1.1
0.5
0.9
1.6
1.2
1.3
1.2
0.8
1.4
0.9
0.8
1.1
1.5
1.9
1.6
1.5
1.4
0.9
0.6
MEDIAN
1.2
0.4
o.g
1.0
1.1
1.8
0.8
1.5
0.7
0.8
1.1
2.2
0.6
0.5
0.7
1.5
0.9
0.9
1.2
1.9
2.7
0.7
1.6
1.3
1.0
0.8
1.3
1.5
1.1
1.4
1.3
0.9
1.4
• 0.9
0.6
1.1
1.3
1'.9
1.6
1.6
1.2
1.3
0.7
STD.
DEV.
O.g
0.4
1.0
03
0.5
0.0
0.0
5.5
1.0
0.5
0.7
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.3
0.9
1.0
0.8
0.7
0.0
1.5
1.0
0.8
2.2
1.8
2.2
0.8
1.2
0.8
0.9
0.7
0.5
3.2
0.3
2.2
0.0
2.4
1.1
0.0
0.9
0.3
0.6
0.6
MAXIMUM
2.5
1.5
2.9
1.5
1.6
1.8
0.8
16.9
3.4
1.1
2.8
2.5
1.8
1.2
1.2
2.5
3.4
3.8
2.8
1.9
4.7
2.5
2.3
5.3
7.1
5.3
2.6
3.2
3.1
3.1
1.8
2.4
16.5
1.1
5.4
1.1
8.9
4.6
1.6
3.8
1.8
1.4
1.7
%>4pCi/L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
• 25
0
0
25
8
17
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
0
20
0
21
17
0
0
0
0
0
%>20pCi/L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

-------
TABLE 1 (continued).  Screening indoor radon data for Georgia.
COUNTY
TAYLOR
TELFAIR
TERRELL
THOMAS
TUT .
TOOMBS
TOWNS
TREUTLEN
TROUP
TURNER
TWIGGS
UNION
UPSON
WALKER
WALTON
WARE
WARREN
WASHINGTON
WAYNE
WEBSTER
WHEELER
WHITE
WfflTFffiLD
WILCOX
WILKES
WILKINSON
WORTH
NO. OF
MEAS.
1
5
2
11
-.. 3
20
5
3
19
3
2
8
11
16
13
22
3
6
11
3
1
8
8
3
9
4
1
MEAN
2,4
0.4
1.1
1.7
1.1
0.9
1.5
0.9
1.3
0.8
1.5
2.7
1.2
2.5
2.7
0.6
0.6
1.6
I.I
0.8
1.3
2.5
1.9
0.2
1.8
1.0
2.5
GEOM.
MEAN
2.4
0.3
1.0
1.3
0.5
0.6
1.3
0.9
1.1
0.8
1.2
1.9
0.9
1.6
1.6
0.5
0.5
1.0
0.8
0.6
1.3
1.2
1.1
0.2
1.4
1.0
2.5
MEDIAN
2.4
0.5
1.1
1.4
1.5
1.0
1.8
0.8
1.2
0.8
1.5
2.3
1.1
1.4
1.1
0.6
0.7
1.4
0.8
0.8
1.3
1.4
2.1
0.1
1.3
1.0
2.5
STD.
DEV.
0.0
0.2
0.7
1.3
1.0
0.6
0.7
0.2
0.7
0.2
1.2
2.5
0.6
2.6
2.9
0.3
0.2
1.6
1.0
0.6
0.0
3.9
1.4
0.2
1.4
0.3
0.0
MAXIMUM
2.4
0.5
1.6
4.9
1.8
2.4
23,
1.1
3.4
1.0
2.3
8.5
2.6
8.3
10.1
1.0
0.7
4.5
3.8
1.4
1.3
12.1
3.6
0.4
4.8
1.5
2,5
%>4pCi/L
0
0
0
9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
0
25
31
0
0
17
0
0
0
13
0
0
11
0
0
%>20pCi/L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

-------
                                                   w
                                             0   10  20  30  40  50
                                             I   1   1   I   I   I
Figure 10.  Counties in Georgia (from Facts on File, 1984).

-------
over a given period of time. Selected aquifers in Georgia have been tested for their radon
concentrations by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Coker and Olive, 1989). Ten wells
were tested in each of nine aquifers within four major geologic provinces, for a total of 90
samples. The results of this study are summarized in Table 2.

TABLE 2.  Radon in water for selected aquifers in Georgia (from Coker and Olive, 1989).
Geologic Province
Piedmont
Piedmont
Piedmont
Piedmont
Blue Ridge
Blue Ridge
Valley and Ridge
Coastal Plain
Coastal Plain
Counties
Gwinnett/Bairow
Greene
ElberJ/Oglethorpe
Spaulding/Pike
LumpMn
Towns
Bartow
Marion
Tlft/Berrien
Avg. Radon in Water
81,180 pCi/L
18,562 pCi/L
ll,760pCi/L
4,676 pCi/L
2,929 pCi/L
2,229 pCi/L
614pCi/L
293pCi/L
778pO/L
Rock Type
Granite Gneiss
Porphyritic Granite
Non-porphyritic
Granite
Granite
Mica Schist/Gneiss
Biotite Gneiss
Dolomitic Limestone
Sand and Gravel
Phosphatie Limestone
Granite and granite gneiss aquifers in the Piedmont of Georgia had the highest radon
concentrations in water.  Schist and gneiss from the Blue Ridge also had high radon concentrations
in water, but the concentrations were significantly less than in Piedmont aquifers.  In general, the
aquifers tested in the Valley and Ridge and Coastal Plain had consistently lower radon in water.
The Environmental Protection Agency has not yet set a maximum contaminant level for radon in
water but is expected to set one soon.

GEOLOGIC RADON POTENTIAL SUMMARY

       For the purpose of this assessment, Georgia has been divided into seven geologic radon
potential areas and each area assigned a Radon Index (RI) and a Confidence Index (CI) score
(Table 3).  These areas are shown in figure 11 and correspond to tectonic/geologic areas shown in
figures 2 and 5. The RI is a relative measure of radon potential based on geology, soils,
radioactivity, architecture, and indoor radon, as outlined in the preceding sections.  The CI is a
measure of the relative confidence of the RI assessment based on the quality and quantity of the
data used to assess geologic radon potential (please refer to the introduction to this regional book
for a detailed discussion  of the indexes).
       The radon potential of rocks and soils in Georgia is predominately low to moderate, with
areas of locally high radon potential. Gregg and Coker (1989,1990) have examined the geologic
controls on radon in Georgia and concluded that granites, granitic gneiss, pegmatites, and
mylonites in the Blue Ridge and Piedmont; carbonaceous shales in the Appalachian Plateau and
Valley and Ridge; phosphatic sediments in the Coastal Plain; and monazite bearing rocks and heavy
mineral placers in the Coastal Plain, Blue Ridge, and Piedmont are likely sources of high indoor
radon levels in Georgia.  In the following discussion, the factors for each of the rankings in this
report are briefly discussed and local variations within each province or subdivision are  indicated:
                                          IV-27    Reprinted from USGS Open-FUe Report 93-292-D.

-------
                             north of the Allatoona Fajl|
       The igneous and metamoiphic rocks in the Georgiabama Thrast Stack north of the Altoona
Fault have been ranked moderate overall in radon potential, but the radon potential of the area is
actually variable. Mafic rocks probably have low radon potential, whereas phyllite, slate, some
metagraywacke, granitic gneiss and granite have moderate to high radon potential. Soil
permeability is slow to" moderate in most soils. Counties in this area have indoor radon averages
that vary from low to high (< 1 pCi/L to > 4 pCi/L), but the measurements are predominantly in the
moderate range. The highest indoor radon reading, 18.7 pCi/L, was measured in the northern
Blue Ridge in Fannin County, which is underlain by metagraywacke, slate, phyllite, and mica
schists. Equivalent uranium concentrations from the NURE data (fig, 7) are moderate to high.

                JTirust Stack, south of the Allatoona Fault
       The Georgiabama Thrust Stack south of the Alatooria Fault is moderate to locally high in
geologic radon potential. The majority of this part of the Georgiabama Thrust Sheet is underlain
by schist and amphibolite of the Zebulon sheet, which have generally low radioactivity where they
are not intruded by granites or not highly sheared, particularly south of the Towaliga Fault An
area with a distinctly low aeroradiometric signature and which is underlain by mafic metamoiphic
rocks lies between the Brevard and Allatoona Faults in the northwestern Georgiabama Thrust
Stack.  All of the soils developed on these rocks have slow to moderate permeability and indoor  .
radon values are generally low to moderate. A central zone of biotite gneiss, granitic gneiss, and
granite has elevated uranium concentrations (Lee, 1980; McConnell and CosteEo, 1980) and high
equivalent uranium (>2.5 ppm)  on the NURE map (fig. 7). Soil permeability is generally slow to
locally moderate. Indoor radon  levels are generally moderate. Recent, unpublished soil-gas radon
studies by A.E. Gates and L.C.S. Gundersen in the Brevard zone and surrounding rocks
(unpublished data, 1990) show that this zone may yield unusually high soil-gas radon where the
zone crosses the Ben Hill and Palmetto granites.  Surface gamma-ray spectrometer measurements
yielded equivalent uranium from 4-17 ppm over granite and granitic biotite gneiss (Lithonia
gneiss). Soil-gas radon concentrations commonly exceeded 2000 pCi/L and the highest soil-gas
radon measured was 26,000 pCi/L in faulted Ben Hill granite. Undeformed Lithonia gneiss had
average soil-gas radon  of more than 2000 pCi/L-  Mica schist averaged less than 1000 pCi/L where
it is undeformed. The Stone Mountain granite and mafic rocks yielded low soil-gas radon. Gregg
and Costello (1992) have also measured very high soil-gas radon concentrations associated with
the Brevard zone-up to 13,000 pCi/L. The Grenville Basement granite and granite gneiss have
moderate to locally high radon potential. Radioactivity is generally moderate to high and soil
permeability is generally moderate.

The Little River Thrust Stack
       The Little River Thrust Stack is generally low to moderate in geologic radon potential. It is
underlain primarily by mafic metamoiphic rocks with low radon potential, but each belt contains
areas of rocks with moderate-to locally high radon potential. Metadacites have moderate
radioactivity and moderate radon potential. Faults and shear zones have local areas of
mineralization and locally high permeability. Granite intrusives may also have moderate radon
potential. Aeroradioactivity is generally low and soil permeability is generally moderate.
                                         IV-28    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
The Rome-Kingston Thrust Stack
       The Rome-Kingston Thrust Stack in the Valley and Ridge Province has been ranked low in
geologic radon potential; however, some of the limestones and shales in this area may have
moderate to high radon potential. Indoor radon concentrations are variable but generally low to
moderate. Permeability of the soils is low to moderate. Equivalent uranium (fig. 7) is moderate to
locally high, especially along the Carter's Dam and Emerson faults. Carbonate soils of the Valley
and Ridge Province cause indoor radon problems in northern Alabama, eastern Tennessee, western
New Jersey, western Virginia, eastern West Virginia (Schultz and others, 1992) and central and
eastern Pennsylvania. The Devonian Chattanooga Shale, which crops out locally in parts of the
Valley and Ridge, is known to be highly uraniferous (Glover, 1959) and has been identified as a
source of high indoor radon in Kentucky (Peake and Schumann,  1991).. The NURE report for the
Rome Quadrangle (Texas Instruments Inc.,  1980) describes numerous radioactivity anomalies
associated with the Pennington Formation, Bangor Limestone, Fort Paine Chert, Chattanooga
Shale, Floyd Shale, the Knox Group, and the Rome Formation.

TheAppalachianPlateau
       The Appalachian Plateau has been ranked low in geologic radon potential. Sandstone is the
dominant rock type and it generally has low uranium concentrations. Equivalent uranium (fig. 7)
is low to moderate. Permeability of the soils is moderate  and indoor radon levels are low.

The Coastal Plain
       The Coastal Plain has been ranked low in radon potential,  but certain areas of the Coastal
Plain in which glauconitic, carbonaceous, and phosphatic  sediments are abundant may have
moderate radon potential. Gundersen and Peake (1992) examined soil radon in the Coastal Plain in
Alabama.  The highest soil-gas radon concentrations (>1000 pCi/L) and equivalent uranium
(>2 ppm) were found in the carbonaceous sands and clays of the  Providence Sand and the
glauconitic sands of the Eutaw and Ripley Formations.  Low to moderate radon and uranium
concentrations were measured in the glauconitic sands,  limestones, and clays of the Tertiary
Nanafalia and Lisbon Formations, and the Tuscahoma Sand. Equivalent uranium (fig. 7) is
moderate in the Cretaceous and Tertiary-age sediments, and low with local highs in the Quaternary
sediments. Radioactivity highs in much of the Coastal Plain are related to phosphate and heavy
mineral concentrations.  In the shoreline complexes and in several sediment units such as the
Hawthorn Formation, the phosphate concentrations are naturally occurring. In the Black Lands
and in many portions of the central Coastal Plain that have abundant agricultural activity, the
radioactivity may be related to the use of phosphate fertilizers. Indoor radon levels in the Coastal
Plain are generally low.
       This is a generalized assessment of the State's geologic radon potential and there is no
substitute for having a home tested.  The conclusions about radon potential presented in this report
cannot be applied to individual homes or building sites. Indoor radon levels, both high and low,
can be quite localized, and within any radon potential area there will likely be areas with higher or
lower radon potential than assigned  to the area as a whole. Any local decisions about radon should
not be made without consulting all available local data.  For additional information on radon and
how to test, contact your State radon program or EPA regional office. More detailed information
on state or local geology may be obtained from the state geological survey. Addresses and phone
numbers for these agencies are listed in chapter 1 of this booklet.
                                         IV-29    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
                                                       o   10  ?o  30  40
                                                      GEOLOGIC RADON POTENTIAL



                                                           MODERATE/VARIABLE



                                                      |    | LOW
         f          •"     ' , ir-'"—•• _T  _f	f
        f'    ««••»•»  -s   	zTi   y-   mr    f
        f H    "   /     V (  .yiHu.   V^

      ...V,  '    >   1  "—~> /  J-V/"-    J^"
      **Tf'/    \  ^    . .»•*-•<.":»"   x
          •''A  f1    ^   xk
          mitiiJ J  —'   J  ^  "
Figure 11. Geologic radon potential areas of Georgia. Refer to Table 3 for RI and

CI scores of numbered areas.

-------
TABLE 3. RI and G scores for geologic radon potential areas of Georgia.
             (3)Georgiabama Thrust Stack
             North of AUatoona Fault
     FACTOR        RI      CI
(4)Geargiabama Thrust Stack
South of Alatoona Fault
    RI     a
          (5)LHfle River Thrust
          Stack
          RI      CI
INDOOR RADON
RADIOACTIVITY
GEOLOGY
SOIL PERM.
ARCHITECTURE
GFE POINTS
. TOTAL

2
2
2
2
1
0
-••9
Mod
2
2
2
2
-
-
8
Mod
(2)Rome-Kingston
Thrust Stack
FACTOR
INDOOR RADON
RADIOACTIVITY
GEOLOGY
SOIL PERM.
ARCHITECTURE
GFE POINTS
TOTAL

RI
2
2
2
1
1
0
8
Low
CI
2
2
2
3
.
.
9
Mod
2
3
2
1
1
0
9
Mod
2
2
2
3
.
-
9
Mod
(l)Appalachian
Plateau
RI
1
2
2
2
1
0
8
Low
a
2
2
2
2
-
-
8
Mod
1 2
2 2
2 2
1 3
1
0
7 9
Low Mod
(6) Coastal Plain
Cretaceou^Tertiary
RI CI
1 2
"2 2
2 2
2 3
1
0
8 9
Low ' Mod
                    (7) Coastal Plain
             Quatemary/Pleistocene-PIiocene gravels
     FACTOR         RI      CI
INDOOR RADON
RADIOACTIVITY
GEOLOGY
SOIL PERM.
ARCHITECTURE
GFE POINTS
TOTAL

1
1
2
2
1
0
7
Low
2
2
2
3 •
.
-
9
Mod
RADON INDEX SCORING:

          Radon potential category
 Point range
          LOW                          3-8 points
          MODERATE/VARIABLE       9-11 points
          HIGH                        > 11 points
Probable screening indoor
  radon average for area
      <2pCi/L
                          f ^"•^'** ""*
                       2-4pCi/L
                       >4pCi/L
                            Possible range of points = 3 to 17

CONFIDENCE INDEX SCORING:
          LOW CONFIDENCE
          MODERATE CONFIDENCE
          HIGH CONFIDENCE
        4-6  points
        7-9  points
       10 - 12 points
                            Possible range of points = 4 to 12
                                        IV-31    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
                        REFERENCES CITED IN THIS REPORT
          AND GENERAL REFERENCES RELEVANT TO RADON IN GEORGIA

Bearee, D.N., Black, W.W., Kish, S.A., and Tull, J.F., eds., 1982, Tectonic studies in the
       Talladega and Carolina Slate belts, Southern Appalachian Orogen: Geological Society of
       America Special Paper 191,164 p.

Coker, G.» and Olive, R., 1989, Radionuclide concentrations jfrom selected aquifers in Georgia:
       U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IV Report, August 1989,21 papers.

Daniels, D.L., 1985, Aeromagnetic map and analyses of aeromagnetic and aeroradioactivity data in
       the Blood Mountain, Chatahoochee and Tray Mountain Roadless Areas, Northern Georgia:
       U.S. Geological Survey map MF-1347-E, scale 1:62,500.

Dillon, M.E., Carter, G.L., Arora, R., and Kahn, B., 1989, Radon concentrations in northeast
       Georgia well water: Health Physics, v. 56, p. 71.

Dillon, M.E., Carter, G.L., Arora, R., and Kahn, B., 1989, The spatial and statistical relationship
       of radon-222 to geologic and hydrogeologic characteristics of an area in the Northeast
       Georgia Piedmont: Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Programs, v. 21, p. 12.

Duval, J.S., Jones, W.J., Riggle, F.R., and Pitkin, J.A.,  1989, Equivalent uranium map of
       conterminous United States: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 89-478,10 p.

Eicholz, G.G., Ambrose, J.P., and SkowrosM, M.G., 1986, Evaluation of potential radon
       exposure from development of Georgia phosphate deposits: Mining Engineering, v. 38,
       p. 195-196.

Facts on File, 1984, State Maps on File: Facts on File Publications.

Friddell, M.S., 1980, Uranium and thorium evaluation of selected sands of coastal Georgia: U.S.
       Geological Survey  Open File Report 80-4,35 p.

Furcon, A.S., 1955, Prospecting for uranium, Part I: Georgia Mineral Newsletter, v. HI,
       p. 28-46.

Garvey, M.J., 1975, Uranium, thorium, and potassium abundances in rocks of the Piedmont of
       Georgia: Master's  thesis, University of Florida, 95 p.

Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 1976, Geologic Map of Georgia, scale 1:250,000.

Glover, Lynn, 1959, Stratigraphy and uranium content of the Chattanooga shale in Northeastern
       Alabama, Northwestern Georgia, and eastern Tennessee: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin
       1087-E,  168 p.

Gohn,  G.S., Smith, C.C.,  Christopher, R.A., and Owens, J.P., 1980, Preliminary cross-sections
       of Cretaceous sediments along the Georgia coastal margin: U.S. Geological Survey Map
       MF 1015-C, scale approx. 1:1600.
                                        IV-32    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
Grauch, R.L, and ZarinsM, K., 1976, Generalized descriptions of uranium-bearing veins,
       pegmatites, and disseminations in non-sedimentary rocks, eastern United States: U.S.
       Geological Survey Open-File Report 76-582,114 p.

Gregg, L.T., and Coker, G., 1989, Geologic controls on radon occurrence in Georgia:
       Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Programs, v. 21, p. 18.

Gregg, L.T.; and Coker, G., 1990, Geologic control on radon occurrence in Georgia: in Bearce,
       D.T., and Neilson, M.J., eds., Case studies in applied geology in the eastern United
       States: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 122, p. 40-47.

Gregg, L.T. and Costello, J., 1992, A radon "pipe" in the Brevard fault zone near Atlanta,
       Georgia, in The 1992 International Symposium on Radon and Radon Reduction
       Technology, Preprints: Research Triangle Park, NC, U.S. Environmental Protection
       Agency, paper "VTII-2, unpaginated (12 p.).

Gundersen, L.C.S., and Peake, R.T., 1992, Radon in the Coastal Plain of Texas, Alabama, and
       New Jersey, in Gates, A.E.,  and  Gundersen, L.C.S., eds., Geologic controls on radon:
       Geological Society of America Special Paper 271, p. 53-64.

Hess, C.T., Korsah, J.K., and Einloth, C.J., 1986,222Rn in homes due to 222Rn in potable
       water, in Hopke, P.K., ed., Radon and its decay products—Occurrence, properties, and
       health effects: American Chemical Society Symposium 331, p. 30-41.

Higgins, H.W., and Zietz, L, 1975, Geologic interpretation of aeromagnetic and aeroradioactivity
       maps of northern Georgia: U.S. Geological Survey Map 1-783, scale 1:500,000.

Higgins, M.W., 1968, Geologic Map of the Brevard Fault Zone Near Atlanta,Georgia:  U.S.
       Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Map 1-511, scale 1:48,000.

Higgins, M.W., and Atkins, R.L., 1981,  The stratigraphy of the Piedmont southeast of the
       Brevard zone in the Atlanta,  Georgia area, in Wigley, P.B., ed., Latest thinking  on the
       stratigraphy of selected areas in Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular
       54-A, p. 3.

Higgins, M.W., Atkins,  R.L., Crawford, T.J., Crawford, R.F., n,  Brooks, R., and Cook,
       R.B., 1988, The structure, stratigraphy, tectonostratigraphy, and evolution of the
       southernmost part of the Appalachian Orogen: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper
       1475, 173 p.

Hodler, T.W., and Schretter, H. A., 1986, The Atlas of Georgia: University of Georgia, Institute
       of Community and Area Development, 273 p.

Hurst, V.J., 1973, Geology of the southern Blue  Ridge belt: American Journal of Science, v. 273,
       p. 643.

Koch, G.S., Jr., 1988, A Geochemical Atlas of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey, Geologic
       Atlas 3, 44 p.
                                         IV-33   Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
Lee, C.H., 1980, National Uranium Resource Evaluation, Athens Quadrangle, Georgia and South
       Carolina: U.S. Department of Energy Report GJQ-002 (80).

Lindberg, F.A., ed,, 1985, Southern Appalachian Region, Correlation of Stratigraphic. Units of
       North America (COSUNA) Project American Association of Petroleum Geologists,
       COSUNA Series, Chart 6.

McConnell, K.I., and Abrams, C.E., 1984, Geology of the Greater Atlanta Region: Georgia
       Geological Survey, Bulletin 96, Plates I-IV.

McConnell, K.I., and Costello, J.O.,' 1980, Uranium evaluation of graphitic phyllites and other
       selected rocks in the Georgia Piedmont and Blue Ridge: Georgia Geological Survey, Open
       File Report 80-5,41 p.

Nazaroff, W.W., and Nero, A.V., Jr., 1988, Radon and its decay products in indoor air:  New
       York, John Wiley and Sons, 518 p.'

Odom, A.L., and Mose, D.G., 1989, Radon potential risk maps for Florida, Georgia and
       Alabama: Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Programs, v, 21, p. 53.

Peake, R.T., and Schumann, R.R., 1991, Regional radon characterizations, in Gundersen,
       L.C.S., and Wanty, R.B., eds., Field Studies of Radon in Rocks, Soils, and Water: U.S.
       Geological Survey Bulletin 1971, p. 163-175.

Perkins, H.F., and Shaffer, M.E., 1977, Soil Associations and Land Use Potential of Georgia
       Soils: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, scale, 1:750,000.

Reinhardt, J., Gibson, T.G., Bybell, L.M., Edwards, L.E., Fredericksen, N.O., Smith, C.C.,
       and Sohl, N.F., 1980, Upper Cretaceous and Lower Tertiary geology of the
       Chattahoochee River valley, western Georgia and eastern ALabama, in Southeastern
       Section, Geological Society of America Field Trip Guidebook, p. 385-392.

Schamel, S., Hanley, T.B., and Sears, J.W., 1980, Geology of the Pine Mountain window and
       adjacent terranes in the Piedmont province of Alabama and Georgia: Geological Society of
       America, Field Trip Guidebook, Southeastern Section, 69 p.

Schultz, A.P., Wiggs, C.R., and Brower, S.D., 1992, Geologic and environmental implications
       of high soil-gas radon concentrations in the Great Valley,  Jefferson and Berkeley Counties,
       West Virginia, in Gates, A.E., and Gundersen, L.C.S., eds., Geologic controls on radon:
       Geological Society of America Special Paper 271, p. 29-44.

Simones, G.C., Wenner, D.B. and Spaulding, J.D.,  1989, Spatial and temporal variations in the
       radon-222 content of ground water in the Piedmont Province of northeastern Georgia:
       Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Programs, v. 21, p. 58.

Texas Instruments Incorporated, 1980, Aerial radiometric and magnetic reconnaissance survey of
       portions of Rome Quadrangle, Alabama and Georgia: U.S. DOE Report GJBX-92, v. 2K.

U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 1987, Soils: U.S. Geological Survey National Atlas sheet
       38077-BE-NA-07M-00, scale 1:7,500,000.'
                                        IV-34   Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
                           EPA's Map of Radon Zones
       The USGS1 Geologic Radon Province Map is the technical foundation for EPA's Map
of Radon Zones.  The Geologic Radon Province Map defines the radon potential for
approximately 360 geologic provinces. EPA has adapted this information to fit a county
boundary map in order to produce the Map of Radon Zones.
       The Map of Radon Zones is based on the same range of predicted screening levels of  "
indoor radon  as USGS' Geologic Radon Province Map.  EPA defines the three zones as
follows:  Zone One areas have an average predicted indoor radon screening potential greater
than 4 pCi/L.  Zone Two areas are predicted to have an  average indoor radon screening
potential between  2 pCi/L and 4 pCi/L.  Zone  Three areas are predicted to have an average
indoor radon  screening potential less than 2  pCi/L.
       Since  the geologic province boundaries cross state and county boundaries, a strict  .
translation of counties from the Geologic Radon Province Map to the Map of Radon Zones
was not possible.  For counties that have variable radon  potential (i.e., are located in two  or
more provinces of different rankings), the counties  were assigned to  a zone based on the
predicted radon potential of the province in  which most  of its area lies. (See Part I for more
details.)

GEORGIA MAP OF RADON ZONES

       The Georgia Map  of Radon Zones and  its supporting  documentation (Part IV of this
report) have received extensive review by Georgia geologists and radon program experts.  The
map for Georgia generally reflects current State knowledge about radon for its counties.
Some States have  been able to  conduct radon investigations in areas  smaller than geologic
provinces and counties, so it is important to  consult locally available data.
             Ten county designations do not  strictly follow the methodology for adapting the
geologic provinces to county boundaries.  EPA, the  Georgia Department of Human Resources
have designated Fulton, Cobb, Dekafb, and Gwinnett as Zone 1 counties and Richmond,
Walker, Catoosa, Whitfieid, Floyd, and Bartow as Zone  2 counties.  These zone changes are
the result of input from the Georgia Department of Human Resources concerning the potential
numbers of homes above  4 pCi/L is these areas based on the available indoor radon
measurements.
       Although the information  provided in Part IV of this report -- the State chapter entitled
"Preliminary  Geologic Radon Potential Assessment of Georgia" — may appear to be quite
specific, it cannot  be" applied to determine the  radon levels of a neighborhood, housing tract,
individual house, etc.  THE ONLY WAY TO DETERMINE IF A  HOUSE HAS
ELEVATED INDOOR RADON IS TO TEST. Contact the Region 10 EPA office or the
Alaska radon program for. information on testing and fixing homes.  Telephone numbers and
addresses can be found in Part  II of this report.
       The State of Georgia Radon Program is compiling data for a  series of population-
weighted radon potential  maps for Georgia. These maps will provide information on the
estimated percentage  of radon screening tests by zip code that can be expected to have values

                                         V-l

-------
over 4 pCi/L.  This information will be used to target home builders and realtors in order to
promote expanded use of radon- resistant building techniques and increased radon screening
of real estate transactions.  Data from the development of the radon potential map presented
herein will be  combined with an expanded radon testing data base and mapping data from the
1990 census to develop target populations for high radon risk. These target populations will
be used in the radon risk outreach programs funded by the Environmental Protection Agency
State Indoor Radon Grant for Georgia.  Information on  the Georgia Population Risk Potential
Maps may be obtained from the Georgia Radon Program at (404) 894-6644.
                                         V-2

-------
GEORGIA -  EPA  Map of Radon Zones

      The purpose of this map is to assist National, Stale and bcal organizations
      to target their resources and to implement radon-resistant building codes,
    This map is not intended to determine rf a home in a given zone should be tested
    for radon. Homes with elevated levels of radon have been found in all three
    zones.  AH homos should be tested, regardless of zone designation.
 Zone 1
Zone 2
Zone 3
IMPORTANT; Consult the publication entitled «Preliminary Geologic Radon
Potential Assessment of Georgia' before using this map. This
document contains information on radon potential variations within counties.
EPA also recommends that this map be supplemented with any available
bcal data In order to further understand and predict the radon potential of a
specific area.

-------
Page Intentionally Blank

-------